Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management:

DFID

Department for International Development 1 Palace Street London SW1E 5HE United Kingdom Switchboard: 020 7023 0000 Facsimile: 020 7023 0016 Internet: www.dfid.gov.uk E-mail: enquiry@dfid.gov.uk Public enquiry point in UK: 0845 3004100; and from overseas: +44 1355 84 3132

United Nations Development Programme One United Nations Plaza New York, New York 10017 U.S.A. Telephone: 212 906 5073 Facsimile: 212 906 6973 Internet: www.undp.org E-mail: surf-env@groups.undp.org

L INKING P OVERTY R EDUCTION AND E NVIRONMENTAL M ANAGEMENT Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Directorate General for Development, European Commission 200 Rue de la Loi 1049 Brussels Belgium Telephone: 2 296 8344 Facsimile: 2 299 2908 Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/development/index_en.htm Public enquiry e-mail: development@cec.eu.int

The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 U.S.A. Telephone: 202 522 3773 Facsimile: 202 477 0565 Internet: www.worldbank.org/environment E-mail: eadvisor@worldbank.org

Printed on recycled, unbleached paper stock using soy inks. Please recycle.

DFID

Department for International Development

Directorate General for Development European Commission

United Nations Development Programme

The World Bank

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Department for International Development, United Kingdom (DFID) Directorate General for Development, European Commission (EC) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) The World Bank JULY 2002

The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 First printing July 2002 All rights reserved.

This publication is a joint product of staff from DFID, EC, UNDP and the World Bank, and while consultations have been considerable, the judgments herein do not necessarily reflect the views of their respective governing bodies, or when applicable, the countries there represented.

Design: Jim Cantrell All photos: World Bank

ii

Contents FOREWORD ACKNOWLEGMENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

v vii ix

OVERVIEW: LINKING POVERTY REDUCTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

1

PART 1: WHY THE ENVIRONMENT MATTERS TO PEOPLE LIVING IN POVERTY

7

1.1

Livelihoods and the environment

10

1.2

Health and the environment

15

1.3

Vulnerability and the environment

18

1.4

Economic growth and the environment

20

PART 2: POLICY OPPORTUNITIES TO REDUCE POVERTY AND IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENT

25

2.1

Improving governance

27

2.2

Enhancing the assets of the poor

37

2.3

Improving the quality of growth

44

2.4

Reforming international and industrial-country policies

52

iii

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

CONCLUSION

61

NOTES

63

REFERENCES

71

BOXES 1.

Key links between the environment and the Millennium Development Goals

11

2.

Burden of water collection on women and children

16

3.

Impacts of global climate change on the poor

19

4.

An improved understanding of poverty-environment relationships

28

5.

Integrating environment in Uganda’s Poverty Eradication Action Plan

30

6.

Indonesia’s Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation, and Rating (PROPER)

33

7.

Tackling corruption in the Cambodian forestry sector

34

8.

Natural resources fuel conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

36

9.

Land tenure and environmental improvements

38

10.

Community forestry in Nepal

39

11.

Improving resource-poor farmers’ access to environmentally sound technology

41

12.

Public-private partnerships for water in South Africa

49

13.

Energy subsidy reform and the poor in China

50

14.

Successful adjustment to environmental health standards

54

15.

Mining companies and the environment in Latin America

55

16.

Curbing industrial-country imports of illegal timber from Indonesia

58

FIGURES 1.

Environment and the Millennium Development Goals

8

2.

Natural resources and household incomes in rural areas of Zimbabwe

13

3.

Burden of disease and environmental risks (1990)

15

4.

Economic growth and environmental quality (1981–98)

22

5.

Key areas for policy action to improve poverty-environment outcomes

26

6.

Adjusted national income accounts in sub-Saharan Africa

47

iv

Foreword

O

ne in five people on the planet—two-thirds of them women—live in abject poverty. While the last century saw great progress in reducing poverty and improving well-being, poverty remains a global problem of huge proportions.

Of the world’s 6 billion people, 2.8 billion live on less than US$2 a day, and 1.2 billion on less than US$1 a day. To address this challenge, the world’s governments committed themselves at the United Nations Millennium Summit to the Millennium Development Goals, including the overarching goal of halving extreme poverty by the year 2015.

At the same time, however, our planet’s capacity to sustain us is eroding. The problems are well known—degrading agricultural lands, shrinking forests, diminishing supplies of clean water, dwindling fisheries, and the threat of growing social and ecological vulnerability from climate change and loss of biological diversity. While these threats are global, their impacts are most severe in the developing world—especially among people living in poverty, who have the least means to cope.

Is this environmental decline inevitable in order for poverty to be reduced? We argue not. Indeed, quite the opposite is true. If we do not successfully arrest and reverse this erosion of natural resources, the world will not be able to meet the Millennium Development Goals, particularly the goal of halving extreme poverty. As this paper demonstrates,

v

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

tackling environmental degradation is an integral

This document is based on contributions

part of effective and lasting poverty reduction. The

from four organizations that are pursuing simi-

2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development

lar objectives for poverty eradication and envi-

(WSSD) provides the international community

ronmental management—the Department for

with a pivotal opportunity to redirect the global

International Development (DFID) in the United

debate, and to forge a more integrated and effec-

Kingdom, the Directorate General for Develop-

tive global response to poverty and environmen-

ment of the European Commission (EC), the Unit-

tal decline.

ed Nations Development Programme (UNDP),

To succeed, we need to focus on the most

and the World Bank. Inspired by our common

important links between poverty, the environ-

agendas and the opportunity provided by WSSD,

ment, and sustainable development. Up until

we have pulled together our existing (but inde-

now, many have argued that ensuring sound en-

pendent) strategies on poverty and environment.

vironmental management means curtailment of

We have consulted widely and are grateful to the

economic opportunities and growth, but without

more than one thousand people from 84 countries

growth we cannot reduce poverty. In fact, there

who have participated in the discussions, many

is no simple relationship between economic

of whom have submitted comments. Drawing

growth and environmental degradation, and ap-

also from the work of others, we have assembled

propriate policies nationally and internationally

evidence of the important linkages between en-

can bring major benefits on both fronts. To this

vironmental management and poverty reduction,

end, we need to look beyond what environmen-

and what we believe are significant policy op-

tal institutions can do, and search for opportuni-

portunities for moving the poverty-environment

ties across all sectors.

agenda forward.

Clare Short Secretary of State for International Development Department for International Development, United Kingdom

vi

Poul Nielson Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid European Commission

Mark Malloch Brown Administrator United Nations Development Programme

James D.Wolfensohn President The World Bank

Overview: Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management

Acknowledgments

T

his report has been prepared by a team consisting of Paul Steele (DFID), Simon Le-Grand (EC), Philip Dobie (UNDP), Peter Hazlewood (UNDP), and Jan BojĂś (World Bank). The team benefited greatly from comments, suggestions, and con-

tributions by the following people: DFID: Fenella Frost, Alicia Herbert, Julian Quan, Julie Thomas, and Yolande Wright.

EC: Marc Debois, Elisabeth Drory, Jean-Pierre Dubois, Karin Eckerdal, Karen Fogg, Bart Kuiter, Andre Liebaert, Philip Mann, Patrick Rabe, Peter Rundell, Artur Runge-Metzger, Maija Sala, Christoph Wagner, and Uwe Werblow.

UNDP: Stephen Browne, Arnaud Comolet, Linda Ghanime, Selim Jahan, Arun Kashyap, Charles McNeill, Leida Mercado, Frank Pinto, Nadine Smith, Alvaro UmaĂąa, Jake Werksman, and Gregory Woodsworth.

World Bank: Gayatri Acharya, Anders Agerskov, Charlotte Bingham, Katie Bolt, John Briscoe, David Cassells, Kenneth Chomitz, Louise Cord, Ashok Dhareshwar, John Dixon, John Flora, Kristalina Georgieva, Kirk Hamilton, Marea Hatziolos, Jane Holt, Hans Ibrekk, Steen Jorgensen, Mats Karlsson, Elizabeth Kelley, Nalin Kishor, Agi Kiss, Jeni Klugman,

vii

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Odin Knudsen, Anil Markandya, Ajay Mathur,

of the International Society of Environmental

Michele de Nevers, Poonam Pillai, Jamal Saghir,

Economics, and in El Salvador at a World Wide

Alexandra Sears, Kristina Sörby, Priya Shyam-

Fund for Nature workshop.

sundar, and Limin Wang.

From 1 February until 31 May 2002, the World Bank Institute hosted an electronic discus-

Other: Marcel Engel (World Business Council for

sion on the Consultation Draft, which drew more

Sustainable Development), Izabella Koziell

than 1,000 participants from 84 countries. Over

(IIED), Melissa Leach (Institute for Development

the course of the four-month e-discussion, a to-

Studies, University of Sussex), Pradeep Tharakan

tal of 668 messages were received, and regular

(Syracuse University), and Harry van der Wulp

summaries of the discussion together with au-

(Global IPM Facility).

thors’ responses were distributed. During the final 10 weeks of the e-discussion, a thematic for-

viii

Comments were received from the following

mat was introduced based on several key topics

individuals through the Poverty-Environment

that had emerged from the discussion, including

Partnership (PEP), an informal network of devel-

directional causality of poverty and environment;

opment agencies pursuing similar objectives of

appropriate technology; quality of growth and

poverty reduction and environmental manage-

environmental management; and trade, foreign

ment: Henk van Trigt (Netherlands); Tomas

direct investment, and the environment. Num-

Andersson, Anders Ekbom, Maria Schultz, and

erous amendments to the previous text in the

Eva Tobisson (Sweden); Thierry Oliveira (UNEP);

Consultation Draft have been inspired by contri-

and Leslie Johnson (United States).

butions to the e-discussion.

The paper has been widely disseminated and

Special thanks go to Rama Chandra Reddy

discussed in the process leading up to the 2002

(World Bank), who moderated the e-discussion

World Summit on Sustainable Development

on the Consultation Draft, and to Jim Cantrell

(WSSD). In January 2002, the paper was issued

(World Bank), who guided the design and pro-

as a Consultation Draft and posted on several

duction of the paper from the Consultation Draft

public websites. The Consultation Draft was pre-

through to this final version.

sented at “side events” during the Second (Janu-

While the authors have made strong efforts

ary 2002) and Third (March 2002) Preparatory

to accommodate comments received, the respon-

Committee meetings for WSSD. It also was pre-

sibility for this paper remains with our four

sented in Tunisia at the 7th Bi-Annual Conference

organizations.

Overview: Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management

Abbreviations and Acronyms DFID

Department for International Development (UK)

EC

European Commission

FSC

Forestry Stewardship Council

GDP

gross domestic product

GEF

Global Environment Facility

IMF

International Monetary Fund

IPM

integrated pest management

MEA

multilateral environmental agreement

NEMA

National Environmental Management Authority (Uganda)

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PEAP

Poverty Eradication Action Plan (Uganda)

PPA

participatory poverty assessment

PRSP

Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper

SPS

sanitary and phyto-sanitary

UNDP

United Nations Development Programme

UNEP

United Nations Environment Programme

WSSD

World Summit on Sustainable Development

ix

O V E R V I E W

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management

Addressing environmental issues that matter to the poor is critical to sustained poverty reduction and achieving the Millennium Development Goals. . . .

But this requires a more “pro-poor� and integrated approach—linking action at local, national, and global levels.

P

repared as a contribution to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management focuses on ways to reduce poverty and sustain growth by improving environmental manage-

ment, broadly defined. It seeks to draw out the links between poverty and the environment and to demonstrate that sound and equitable management of the environment is integral to achieving the Millennium Development Goals, in particular to eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, reducing child mortality, combating major diseases, and ensuring environmental sustainability.

1

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Four priority areas for sustained policy and institutional change are highlighted:

lated conflict. Addressing these poverty-environment linkages must be at the core of national efforts to eradicate poverty.

Improving governance to create a more

Many opportunities exist to reduce poverty

enabling policy and institutional environment

by improving the environment—but there are

for addressing the poverty-environment

significant and often deeply entrenched policy

concerns of the poor, with particular attention

and institutional barriers to their widespread

to the needs of women and children.

adoption. The decade of experience since the 1992

Enhancing the assets of the poor to expand

Earth Summit in Rio reveals some important les-

sustainable livelihood opportunities and to

sons that help point the way forward. Three broad

reduce the poor’s vulnerability to environmen-

lessons are highlighted here:

tal hazards and natural resource–related conflict.

First and foremost, poor people must be

Improving the quality of growth to promote

seen as part of the solution rather than

sound environmental management and protect

part of the problem. Efforts to improve

the environmental assets and livelihood

environmental management in ways that

opportunities of the poor.

contribute to sustainable growth and

Reforming international and industrial-

poverty reduction should reflect the

country policies to address the poverty and

priorities of the poor. Supportive policies

environment concerns of developing countries

and institutions are needed, including

and the poor.

access to information and decisionmaking, that expand the poor’s opportunities to invest in environmental improvements that can enhance their livelihoods. At the same

Policy opportunities exist to reduce poverty and improve the environment

time, it is essential to address the activities of the non-poor, since they are the source of most environmental damage.

The environment matters greatly to people liv-

2

The environmental quality of growth

ing in poverty. The poor often depend directly

matters to the poor. It cannot be assumed

on a wide range of natural resources and ecosys-

that environmental improvement can be

tem services for their livelihoods; they are often

deferred until growth has alleviated

the most affected by unclean water, indoor air

income poverty and rising incomes make

pollution, and exposure to toxic chemicals; and

more resources available for environmental

they are particularly vulnerable to environmen-

protection. This ignores the importance of

tal hazards (such as floods, prolonged drought,

environmental goods and services to

and attacks by crop pests) and environment-re-

people’s livelihoods and well-being, and

Overview: Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management

how the diversity of these goods and

Strengthen decentralization for environ-

services contribute to the poor’s opportu-

mental management by integrating

nities for moving out of poverty. Further,

poverty-environment issues into sub-

there are many examples of how bad

national policy and planning processes and

environmental management is bad for

sectoral investment programs.

growth, and of how the poor suffer most

Empower civil society, in particular poor

from environmental degradation. Ignoring

and marginalized groups, to influence

the environmental soundness of growth—

environmental management policy and

even if this leads to short-run economic

planning processes at all levels by expand-

gains—can undermine growth itself and its

ing public access to environmental infor-

effectiveness in reducing poverty.

mation, decisionmaking, and justice.

Environmental management cannot be

Address gender dimensions of poverty-

treated separately from other development

environment issues by ensuring that they

concerns. Rather, it must be integrated into

are fully integrated into the formulation,

poverty reduction and sustainable develop-

implementation, and monitoring of

ment efforts in order to achieve significant

poverty reduction strategies and related

and lasting results. Improving environmental

policy reforms.

management in ways that benefit the poor

Strengthen anti-corruption efforts to

requires policy and institutional changes that

protect the environment and the poor

cut across sectors and that lie mostly outside

by improving legislative and regulatory

the control of environmental institutions—

frameworks and oversight mechanisms,

changes in governance, domestic economic

by increasing the penalties for violators,

and social policies, and international and

and by ensuring effective mechanisms for

industrial-country policies.

feedback from communities to enforcement agencies.

Reduce environment-related conflict by improving conflict resolution mechanisms

Improving governance

in the management of natural resources

Integrate poverty-environment issues into

and biodiversity and by addressing the

national development frameworks by

underlying political and economic issues

addressing the environmental concerns of

that affect resource access and use, includ-

the poor in nationally owned poverty

ing the role of corruption.

reduction strategies and related macroeco-

Improve poverty-environment monitoring

nomic and sectoral policy reforms, so that

and assessment by strengthening govern-

they can become national sustainable

ment and civil society capacity to monitor

development strategies.

environmental change and how it affects

3

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

the poor, by integrating poverty-environ-

pro-poor technology development, and by

ment indicators into national poverty

involving the poor in technology research,

monitoring systems, and by building

demonstration, and dissemination.

capacity to apply monitoring and assess-

Reduce the environmental vulnerability

ment results to poverty-environment

of the poor by strengthening participatory

policy formulation and implementation.

disaster preparedness and risk reduction and mitigation capacity, by supporting the formal and informal coping strategies of vulnerable groups, and by expanding

Enhancing the assets of the poor

access to insurance and other risk management mechanisms.

Strengthen resource rights of the poor by reforming policies and formal and informal institutions that influence land and natural resource access, ownership, control, and

Improving the quality of growth

benefit-sharing, with particular attention to resource rights for women.

economic policy reforms by expanding the

environment—including conservation and

use of strategic environmental assessment

sustainable use of land, water, and biologi-

and poverty social impact analysis ap-

cal resources, and access to clean energy,

proaches and by strengthening environ-

water, and sanitation services—by

mental management standards and moni-

strengthening local management arrange-

toring capabilities.

Increase the use of environmental valua-

women’s key roles in managing natural

tion in adjusting national income accounts

resources.

and determining appropriate price levels

Expand access to environmentally sound

to better reflect the value of environmental

and locally appropriate technology—such

goods and services and to improve eco-

as crop production technologies that

nomic decisionmaking.

conserve soil, water, and agrobiodiversity

4

Integrate poverty-environment issues into

Enhance the poor’s capacity to manage the

ments and capacity and by supporting

Encourage appropriate private-sector

and that minimize the use of pesticides, or

involvement by strengthening government

appropriate renewable energy and energy-

and community capacities to partner with

efficient technologies that also minimize air

the private sector to expand environmental

pollution—by improving protection of and

services for the poor, by providing incen-

access to indigenous knowledge and

tives for local enterprise development based

technologies, by improving incentives for

on the sustainable use of biodiversity (such

Overview: Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management

as community-based ecotourism or sustain-

Make foreign direct investment more

able harvest of natural products), and by

pro-poor and pro-environment by encour-

putting in place appropriate regulations and

aging corporations’ compliance with the

voluntary codes to safeguard the interests of

revised Code of Conduct for Multinational

the poor and the environment.

Enterprises from the Organisation for

Implement pro-poor environmental fiscal

Economic Co-operation and Development,

reform by pricing natural resources appro-

by raising awareness among shareholders

priately, particularly energy and water; by

and investors of corporate social and

expanding the use of fiscal incentives to

environmental responsibility issues, and

promote environmentally sound practices

by expanding the United Nations Environ-

and sustainable use of biodiversity; by

ment Programme’s Global Reporting

improving the use of rent taxes to better

Initiative and other approaches to improv-

capture and more effectively allocate

ing corporate social and environmental

natural resource revenues; and by improv-

reporting.

ing the use of pollution charges to better

reflect environmental costs in market prices.

Enhance the contribution of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) to poverty reduction by strengthening developing-country capacity to participate in the negotiation and implementation of

Reforming international and industrial-country policies

MEAs (for example, to ensure that the Clean Development Mechanism promotes

Improve international and industrial-

investments that benefit the poor and the

country trade policies by addressing trade-

environment), by improving coordination

environment-poverty links in the negotia-

among MEAs so that scarce developing-

tion and implementation of multilateral

country capacity is used most effectively,

trade agreements, by reforming trade-

and by increasing funding for the Global

distorting agricultural subsidies and trade

Environment Facility as a major source of

barriers to give developing countries

finance for global public goods in the

equitable access to international markets

environment, such as a stable climate,

and to encourage environment-friendly

maintenance of biodiversity, and protection

products and trade practices, and by

of international waters and the ozone layer.

eliminating subsidies that lead to unsus-

Encourage sustainable consumption and

tainable exploitation—such as subsidies for

production. Industrial-country consumers

large-scale commercial fishing fleets that

and producers through their trade, invest-

encourage overharvesting in developing-

ment, pollution, and other activities affect the

country fisheries.

environmental conditions of developing

5

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

countries. Making rich-country consumption and production more sustainable will require

Conclusion

a complex mix of institutional changes—

6

addressing market and government failures

This paper looks ahead with some degree of hope

as well as broad public attitudes.

and optimism for the future—there are some-

Enhance the effectiveness of development

times win-win opportunities, and there are

cooperation and debt relief in addressing

rational ways of dealing with tradeoffs. Environ-

poverty-environment issues, particularly for

mental degradation is not inevitable, nor is it the

the poorest countries, where aid and debt

unavoidable result of economic growth. On the

relief continue to have a valuable role to

contrary, sound and equitable environmental

play in helping governments make many of

management is key to sustained poverty reduc-

the changes needed. This includes

tion and achievement of the Millennium Devel-

“mainstreaming” environment in donor

opment Goals. There are significant policy

agency policies and operations through staff

opportunities to reduce poverty and improve the

training; development and application of

environment, but more integrated and pro-poor

new skills, tools, and approaches; and

approaches are needed. The World Summit on

revisions to the way resources and budgets

Sustainable Development is an opportunity to

are allocated. Improved monitoring of

focus on what is most important and to forge a

progress against stated objectives and

coherent framework for action, with clear goals

targets is needed in order to hold develop-

and achievable targets backed up by adequate

ment agencies accountable and to ensure

resources and effective and transparent monitor-

that a commitment by senior management

ing mechanisms. There can be no more impor-

to addressing poverty-environment issues is

tant goal than to reduce and ultimately eradicate

put into practice throughout organizations.

poverty on our planet.

P A R T

1

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty “Water is life and because we have no water, life is miserable.” (Kenya) “We think the earth is generous; but what is the incentive to produce more than the family needs if there are no access roads to get produce to a market?”

(Guatemala) “In the monsoons there is no difference between the land in front of our house and the public drain. You can see for yourself.” (India)

I

n their own words, the environment matters greatly to people living in poverty.1 Indeed, poor people’s perceptions of well-being are strongly related to the environment in terms of their livelihoods, health, vulnerability, and empowerment to control their

own lives. Figure 1 provides a simplified framework for understanding how environmental management relates to poverty reduction, and why these poverty-environment linkages must be at the core of action to achieve the Millennium Development Goals and related national poverty eradication and sustainable development objectives.

7

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Environment and the Millennium Development Goals F I G U R E

Environmental management for poverty reduction

Dimensions of poverty

Development goals Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

1 Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education

Ensure sound and equitable management of biodiversity and ecosystems

Ensure access to safe water and sanitation services

Enhance livelihood security

Goal 3: Promote gender equality

Improve air quality and limit exposure to toxic chemicals

Reduce health risk

Goal 4: Reduce child mortality

Reduce and mitigate natural disasters and resource-based conflict

Reduce vulnerability

Goal 5: Improve maternal health

Reduce and mitigate climate variability and change

Goal 6: Combat major diseases

Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability

Part 1 of the paper focuses on the poverty-

the environment is degraded or their access

environment relationship by examining how the environment and environmental change in both

to natural resources is limited or denied.

Health—poor people suffer most when

rural and urban settings affect the poor in terms

water, land, and the air are polluted, and

of three key dimensions of human poverty:

environmental risk factors are a major source of health problems in developing countries.

8

Livelihoods—poor people tend to be most

Vulnerability—the poor are most often

dependent upon the environment and the

exposed to environmental hazards and

direct use of natural resources, and there-

environment-related conflict, and are least

fore are the most severely affected when

capable of coping when they occur.

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

We also are concerned with the relationship

raw materials. The environment is also a

between growth and the environment and how

recipient and partial recycler of waste

it affects the poor and efforts to reduce poverty.

products from the economy and an impor-

The environmental soundness of growth is criti-

tant source of recreation, beauty, spiritual

cal to the livelihood opportunities of the poor,

values, and other amenities.

and countries with similar levels of income and

Poverty-environment linkages are dy-

growth can have quite different levels of envi-

namic and context-specific—reflecting

ronmental performance as a result of differing

both geographic location and scale and

policy and institutional frameworks and imple-

the economic, social, and cultural charac-

mentation capacities.

teristics of individuals, households, and

While Figure 1 illustrates the main pathways

social groups. Different social groups can

between environmental conditions and dimen-

give priority to different environmental

sions of poverty, in reality these linkages are dy-

issues. In rural areas, poor people are

namic and often interconnected:

particularly concerned with secure access to and the quality of natural resources—

Poverty is now widely viewed as encom-

arable land and water, crop and livestock

passing both income and non-income

diversity, fish and bushmeat resources,

dimensions of deprivation—including lack

forest products and biomass for fuel. For

of income and other material means; lack

the urban poor, water, energy, sanitation

of access to basic social services such as

and waste removal, drainage, and secure

education, health, and safe water; lack of

tenure are key concerns. Poor women

personal security; and lack of empower-

regard safe and physically close access to

ment to participate in the political process

potable water, sanitation facilities, and

and in decisions that influence someone’s

abundant energy supplies as crucial

life. The dynamics of poverty also are

aspects of well-being, reflecting women’s

better understood, and extreme vulnerabil-

primary role in managing the household

ity to external shocks is now seen as one of

(Brocklesby and Hinshelwood, 2001;

its major features (UNDP, 1997).

UNDP and EC, 2000).

Environment refers to the living (biodiversity) and non-living components

Environmental management needs to reflect

of the natural world, and to the interactions

the multidimensional and dynamic nature of

between them, that together support life on

poverty-environment linkages. Thus, as used in

earth. The environment provides goods

this paper, environmental management extends

(natural resources) and services (ecosystem

well beyond the activities of environmental in-

functions) used for food production, the

stitutions in order to meet two fundamental and

harvesting of wild products, energy, and

inter-related challenges: the need to manage and

9

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

sustain the long-term capacity of the environment

Tangible progress also has been achieved

to provide the goods and services on which hu-

“on the ground,” although the picture is usual-

man development depends, and the need to en-

ly mixed. For example, in the 1990s some 900

sure secure and equitable access by the poor to

million people gained access to improved wa-

environmental assets and the benefits that they

ter sources. This was merely enough to keep

can provide in order to expand people’s liveli-

pace with population growth, however, and

hood opportunities, protect their health and ca-

about 1.2 billion people are still without access

pacity to work, and reduce their vulnerability to

to improved water sources, with rural popula-

environment-related risks.

tions particularly under-served (Devarajan,

This broader approach to environmental

Miller, and Swanson, 2002).

management and poverty reduction calls for pol-

Despite progress in some areas, pressure on

icy and institutional change across many sectors

the environment continues to mount worldwide,

and involving many actors in the public, private,

posing major challenges to the prospects for pov-

and civil society arenas—within both develop-

erty reduction and human development in devel-

ing and industrial countries and at the interna-

oping countries, particularly the least developed

tional level. These actions need to affect political

ones. The situation is summed up succinctly in

and economic processes—both of which have a

the 2002 Global Environment Outlook of the Unit-

major impact on how the environment is man-

ed Nations Environment Programme (UNEP):

aged and how poor and marginalized groups are

“The level of awareness and action has not been

affected.

commensurate with the state of the global envi-

There have been some impressive gains since

ronment today; it continues to deteriorate”

the 1972 United Nations Conference on the

(UNEP, 2002b). Box 1 summarizes key environ-

Human Environment, which was the first global

mental challenges facing developing countries in

conference devoted to environment and devel-

relation to the Millennium Development Goals.

opment issues. There has been a proliferation of

These linkages are addressed in more detail in

environmental policies and institutions at nation-

the following sections on livelihoods, health, vul-

al and sub-national levels, and environmental

nerability, and growth.

issues are firmly placed on the agendas of governments, civil society, and the private sector.

Major global environmental agreements have been forged and global environmental organiza-

1.1 Livelihoods and the environment

tions established. Environmental sustainability has become a core concern of bilateral and multilateral development cooperation, and billions of dollars have been spent on environment-related programs and projects.

10

“There is a strong correlation between sound natural resource management and poverty reduction.” (Cambodia Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, 2000)

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

BOX 1

Key links between the environment and the Millennium Development Goals

Millennium Development Goal

Examples of links to the environment

1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

Livelihood strategies and food security of the poor often depend directly on healthy ecosystems and the diversity of goods and ecological services they provide.

2. Achieve universal primary education

Time spent collecting water and fuelwood by children, especially girls, can reduce time at school.

3. Promote gender equality and empower women

Poor women are especially exposed to indoor air pollution and the burden of collecting water and fuelwood, and have unequal access to land and other natural resources.

4. Reduce child mortality

Water-related diseases such as diarrhea and cholera kill an estimated 3 million people a year in developing countries, the majority of which are children under the age of five.

5. Improve maternal health

Indoor air pollution and carrying heavy loads of water and fuelwood adversely affect women’s health and can make women less fit for childbirth and at greater risk of complications during pregnancy.

6. Combat major diseases

Up to one-fifth of the total burden of disease in developing countries may be associated with environmental risk factors—and preventive environmental health measures are as important and at times more cost-effective than health treatment.

7. Ensure environmental sustainability

Current trends in environmental degradation must be reversed in order to sustain the health and productivity of the world’s ecosystems.

The poor, particularly those living in rural areas,

billion people live on marginal lands (World

often rely on a variety of natural resources (biodi-

Bank, 2002d). Limited access to land and other

versity) and ecosystem services as a direct source

natural resources is another key aspect of rural

of livelihood. Increasingly, the rural poor live in

poverty—more than half of the rural poor have

areas of high ecological vulnerability and rela-

landholdings too small to provide an adequate

tively low levels of biological or resource pro-

income, and nearly a quarter are landless

ductivity, such as subtropical drylands or steep

(UNCHS, 1996). Thus, both environmental con-

mountain slopes. New estimates for the World

ditions and access to a variety of natural resourc-

Development Report 2003 indicate that some 1.3

es are crucial to the ability of poor people to

11

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

sustain their livelihoods. “Variety” is key since

rural poor and is a cornerstone of poverty reduc-

the poor need to have options so that they can

tion strategies in many countries.

continually diversify and differentiate their use of

Poor people are affected by natural resource

available natural resources as environmental con-

degradation and biodiversity loss much more

ditions change (BDP, 2001; Koziell, 2001; Koziell

than the better off because of their limited as-

and Saunders, 2001.

sets and their greater dependence on common property resources for their livelihoods. For

Biodiversity and natural resources

example, in a study in West Africa, children showing growth abnormalities associated with

Natural resources can be a primary source of live-

poor nutrition (stunting) were found most fre-

lihood or may supplement a household’s daily

quently in areas of high soil degradation (GRID/

needs and income. A growing body of research

Arendal, 1997).

shows that poor rural households often derive a

Current estimates are that up to 1 billion peo-

significant share of their incomes from natural

ple are affected by soil erosion and land degra-

resources. An excellent study from Zimbabwe

dation due to deforestation, overgrazing, and

(Cavendish, 1999) illustrates the degree of natu-

agriculture. Water scarcity is a major issue in

ral resource dependence of poor people in rural

more than 20 developing countries. If current

2

12

areas. Two facts stand out from his analysis: the

trends in water use persist, two-thirds of the

poorest are most dependent on environmental

world’s population could be living in countries

income in relative terms, but the somewhat bet-

experiencing moderate or severe water scarcity

ter off make more use of natural resources in ab-

by 2025. Fisheries provide livelihoods for some

solute terms (see Figure 2). Hence, degradation

of the poorest and most marginalized groups, and

of natural resources would hurt the poorest the

often are the main source of animal protein for

most. However, rising income would tend to in-

the poor. Yet many small-scale fisheries are over-

crease the use of natural resources; growth will

harvested, often by commercial enterprises that

not automatically alleviate environmental pres-

do not benefit the poor (IFAD, 2001; WRI, 2000;

sure in this context.

UNEP, 2002a).

Natural resource degradation and biodiver-

Over 2 billion people continue to rely on bio-

sity loss are undermining the livelihoods and

mass fuels and traditional technologies for cook-

future livelihood opportunities of large numbers

ing and heating, and 1.5–2 billion people have

of the poor. This is most evident with respect to

no access to electricity (UNDP, UNDESA, and

agricultural systems. Soil and water degradation

World Energy Council, 2000). Shortage of wood

and the loss of pest and drought-resistant crop

fuel imposes time and financial costs on poor

and livestock varieties are major threats to im-

households, putting a particular burden on those

proving agricultural productivity, which under-

that are short of labor and making it harder for

pins the livelihoods of the vast majority of the

children to attend school.

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

Natural resources and household income in rural areas of Zimbabwe F I G U R E

Income shares by quintile and major income source 100

80

2

60

40

20

0 Lowest 20%

20% to 40%

40% to 60%

60% to 80%

Top 20%

Quintile

Environmental income

Cash

Net gifts

Own produced goods

Income in Z$ by quintile and major income source 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Lowest 20%

20% to 40%

40% to 60%

60% to 80%

Top 20%

Quintile Source: Cavendish, 1999.

13

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

isms important to agricultural productivity; watershed protection and hydrological stability, including recharging of water tables and buffering of extreme hydrological conditions that might otherwise precipitate drought or flood conditions; maintenance of soil fertility through storage and cycling of essential nutrients; and breakdown of waste and pollutants.

These services are “public goods,” providing indirect values that are only partially traded Poor rural women are disproportionately

in the marketplace but that are vital to the liveli-

affected by natural resource degradation and

hoods of the poor, especially in more marginal

biodiversity loss. For example, participatory pov-

environments or where the poor have limited

erty assessments and other studies have shown

access to external technology and other inputs

the increased time, physical burden, and person-

(Koziell and Saunders, 2001). By maintaining pro-

al risk that women face in having to travel great-

ductivity and a healthy and stable environment,

er distances in order to collect fuel, fodder, and

ecosystem services also contribute to maintain-

water due to growing resource scarcity or more

ing livelihood options and the potential for live-

restricted access to common property areas. This

lihood diversification. When ecosystem functions

reduces the time spent on income-generating ac-

are impaired, this inevitably leads to a narrow-

tivities, crop production, and household and

ing of livelihood choices and an increase in the

child-rearing responsibilities (Brocklesby and

vulnerability of the poor (BDP, 2001; Koziell,

Hinshelwood, 2001; Dasgupta and Das, 1998).

2001; Koziell and Saunders, 2001).

While biologically diverse ecosystems can be

Biodiversity and ecosystem services

highly resilient to human disturbances, certain ecosystem types are at particular risk of a sud-

14

Ecosystems—such as forests, agroecosystems,

den collapse. For example, coral reefs and fresh-

grasslands, and freshwater and coastal eco-

water systems may go from a functioning to a

systems (including coral reefs) and the bio-

nonfunctioning state in a very short time due to

diversity contained within them—provide

pollution, overuse, or other perturbations that

essential “services” that contribute in numerous

reduce biodiversity or that exceed a certain

ways to productive activities. Some examples of

threshold of tolerance. The consequence is that

ecosystem services that support livelihoods in-

people who depend on these ecosystems may find

clude provision of natural habitat for wild polli-

themselves deprived of essential goods and ser-

nators that are essential to food crops; natural

vices in a relatively short time span and unable

predators that control crop pests and soil organ-

to cope or adapt (Folke, 2002).

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

1.2 Health and the environment

Burden of disease and environmental risks (1990) DALYs per million people

“A study in Tegucigalpa showed . . . high lead intoxication in the children attending public schools. The study also notes that contaminants in soil and water are responsible for a high index of diarrhea diseases. . . . Soil and water pollution is further compounded by solid waste dumping with low coverage of garbage collection services, poor waste management, and the lack of sanitary landfills. Respiratory diseases are also common, especially among children under five . . . partly caused by increasing number of cars and the presence of factories that are not subject to any kind of environmental regulations.” (Honduras Poverty Reduction Strategy, 2001)

Up to one-fifth of the total burden of disease in

300,000 250,000

F I G U R E 3

200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0

LDCs

Industrial countries

Other DALYs Environmental DALYs Note: Disability-adjusted life-years are a measure of the burden of disease. They reflect the total amount of health life lost to all causes, whether from premature mortality or from some degree of disability during a period of time.

Source: Lvovsky, 2001.

the developing world—and up to 30 percent in sub-Saharan Africa—may be associated with en-

people are acutely aware of how poor environ-

vironmental risk factors.3 This is comparable to

mental health affects their ability to move out of

malnutrition and larger than any other prevent-

poverty (Brocklesby and Hinshelwood, 2001;

able risk factors and groups of disease causes.

Narayan, 2000).

While the total burden of disease in poor coun-

Analyzing the impact on the poor of policy

tries is about twice that of rich countries, the dis-

changes and investments is important in bring-

ease burden from environmental risks is 10 times

ing out the specifics in the relationship between

larger in poor countries (see Figure 3). The poor,

income growth and environmental quality. Such

particularly women and children, are most affect-

analysis frequently shows that the poor stand to

ed by environmental health problems, and tradi-

benefit from environmental interventions now

tional environmental hazards—lack of safe water

rather than later. Many interventions are low-

and sanitation, indoor air pollution, and expo-

cost, yet can save people from disease that can

sure to disease vectors—play by far the largest

seriously impair their earning capability and

role (Lvovsky, 2001; WHO, 1997).4 Indeed, poor

welfare.5

15

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Water and sanitation

era, kill an estimated 3 million people a year in developing countries, the majority of whom are

Inadequate access to safe drinking water and san-

children under the age of five (Murray and

itation, combined with poor hygiene practices,

Lopez, 1996).

are major causes of ill health and life-threatening

Vector-borne diseases such as malaria ac-

disease in developing countries. The rural poor

count for up to 2.5 million deaths a year and are

rely on natural water sources such as streams for

linked to a range of environmental conditions and

their washing and drinking water (see Box 2).

factors related to water contamination and inad-

Water-related diseases, such as diarrhea and chol-

equate sanitation (WRI, 1998). These are likely to worsen as a result of climate change (IPCC, 2001).

BOX 2

Burden of water collection on women and children

Pollutants Indoor air pollution caused by the burning of tra-

A recent water use study in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania went back to the same 34 sites that were studied in 1972. Water is still primarily collected by women and children and carried on the head, leading to headaches, general fatigue, and pains in the chest, neck, and waist. The distance walked to collect water was about 580 m in rural areas (although for some it can reach over 4 km) and 300 m in urban areas.

This is a slight improvement since 1972 due to more standpipes, wells, and private vendors, including in rural areas. Due to population increase, however, time spent queuing has increased significantly, especially in urban areas. A return journey to collect water takes about 25 minutes (double the time since 1972), and 3.9 trips per day are made by each household. Thus, an average household spends 1 hour and 40 minutes each day collecting water. This reduces time for cooking and can affect the amount of time children spend at school.

ditional biomass fuels (wood, dung, crop residues) for cooking and heating affects 1 billion people, resulting in premature death for an estimated 2 million women and children each year (Smith, 1999). In India, recent studies suggest that 130,000–150,000 women may die prematurely as a result of indoor air pollution (Smith, 2000). A new study of rural households in central Kenya found that “exposure to high emissions from cooking and other domestic activities for adults results in women being twice as likely as men to be diagnosed with acute respiratory infection or acute lower respiratory infections” (Ezzati and Kammen, 2001). This has been confirmed by similar studies in Gambia (Campbell, 1997) and Guatemala (Bruce et al., 1998). In addition, the increased time and energy involved in the collection of biomass fuels contributes to the physical burden and ill health of women and children.

Source: IIED, 2002.

Outdoor air pollution is becoming a more significant health issue in urban areas of a num-

16

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

ber of developing countries, especially in large

“exposure� that can result in either acute illness

industrializing ones such as China and India,

or chronic health impacts, estimates for Africa

and is projected to become as important a health

alone point to some 11 million cases per year

risk as indoor air pollution over the next two

(Goldman and Tran, 2002). The poor also suffer

decades.

more indirect effects from excessive use of pesti-

Pesticide poisoning is a significant health

cides, such as depletion of fish stocks due to pes-

problem among poor farmers in developing

ticide loads in agricultural runoff. Contamination

countries, although the exact extent is not well

of food crops with pesticide residues is a grow-

documented. One estimate by the World Health

ing income problem for farmers producing for

Organization in 1990 indicated some 3 million

export markets, as several important markets are

cases of acute, severe poisoning per year world-

tightening their regulations regarding permissi-

wide. Widening the scope to cases of pesticide

ble levels of pesticide residues.

17

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

1.3 Vulnerability and the environment

well as to more gradual processes of environmental degradation (“stresses”)—as the majority of the rural poor live in ecologically fragile

“Natural disasters are a risk factor, which affect the pace of economic growth and destroy the assets of the poorest segments of the population in affected areas, reducing them to a state of dependency, at least temporarily, on donations . . . natural disasters seriously affect the living conditions of affected populations, and constitute an obstacle to a definite break with certain degrees and patterns of poverty. Therefore, measures aimed at managing this risk are of the utmost importance.” (Mozambique Action Plan for the Reduction of Absolute Poverty, 2001–2005)

areas, while the urban poor often live and work in environments with a high exposure to environmental hazards. By worsening economic deprivation in the short term, environmental disasters can compromise long-term welfare by forcing affected households to sell assets that would otherwise be used to meet future needs and contingencies. The effects of droughts and long-term land degradation are felt more gradually. They may build up over several years, during which a household’s accumulated reserves are run down as a result of recurrent years of poor production. This will result in a slow but inexorable inability to invest in production and often leads to impoverishment and the abandonment of land.

Insecurity is one of the key concerns of poor peo-

Natural hazards claim an estimated 100,000

ple, including their vulnerability to unpredictable

lives each year and inflict billions of dollars in

events. Insecurity relates to people’s risk of ex-

damage. While natural hazards can strike every-

posure, susceptibility to loss, and capacity to re-

where, about 97 percent of the deaths related to

cover. Both the rural and the urban poor are most

such disasters occur in developing countries. The

often exposed to environmental hazards and

relative economic losses are also highest in poor

environment-related conflict, they suffer the

countries (ISDR Secretariat, 2002). Natural disas-

greatest losses (at least in relative terms), and they

ters affected an estimated 256 million people in

are in the weakest position to cope and adapt.

developing countries in 2000 (ICRC, 2001).

When asked, the poor talk of living in in-

Environmental stresses and shocks

creasingly fragile environments and experiencing natural hazards, changing climatic con-

18

Resource mismanagement and environmental

ditions, and unpredictable seasons. These

degradation can exacerbate the frequency and

environmental stresses were making livelihood

impact of droughts, floods, forest fires, and oth-

tasks more time-consuming, more dangerous,

er natural hazards. The poor are the most vul-

and more costly, and they often required more

nerable to environmental disasters (“shocks”) as

inputs. Poor people highlight their dependence

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

on the diversity of common property or open access resources—grazing lands, water bodies, and forests and the variety of products they

BOX 3

Impacts of global climate change on the poor

hold—as a safety net during hard times. A decline in the abundance and diversity of these resources reduces people’s livelihood options and increases their vulnerability (Brocklesby and Hinshelwood, 2001).

Increasingly, environmental degradation and disasters cause their victims to migrate in search of better conditions. People may be able to recover, with help, from sudden disasters, and they often return and rebuild after floods and storms.

But long-term attrition caused by drought or land degradation has led to permanent migration from susceptible areas such as the Sahel. The Red Cross estimates that 1998 was the first year in which the number of refugees from environmental disasters exceeded those displaced as a result of war (ICRC, 1999). Much of the information on environmental degradation and disasters as a source of migration is anecdotal, however, and it is dif-

Climate change will particularly affect poor countries that will find adaptation measures more costly, and will affect poor people who have more-limited coping mechanisms. Major impacts include declining water availability, reduced agricultural productivity, the spread of vector-borne diseases to new areas, increased flooding from sea level rise, and heavier rainfall.

In Bangladesh, the risk of flooding is predicted to rise by 20 percent in the next 20–50 years. Predicted yield changes for wheat, maize, and rice by 2020 suggest that yields in Nigeria and Brazil will fall by 2.5–5 percent, and in India by 5–10 percent (although there are also countries where yields may rise). Relatively small increases in temperature may spread malaria into large urban areas such as Nairobi and Harare that currently lie just outside the malaria range.

ficult to analyze the complex system of interconnected social, demographic, and environmental

Source: IPCC, 2001; IIASA, 2001; CGIAR, 2000.

phenomena that together form the basis for crossborder migration (Leighton, 1999).

The frequency, intensity, and duration of ex-

Poor people use a range of coping mecha-

treme weather events is likely to increase as a

nisms and survival strategies in the face of envi-

result of climate change. The latest report on the

ronmental degradation and disasters. But their

impacts of climate change suggest that many de-

capacity to mitigate and recover from disaster is

veloping countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin

often constrained by the wider policy and insti-

America will suffer potentially significant neg-

tutional context, in addition to factors related to

ative impacts from increased food insecurity,

their social and economic status. For example, in

greater spread of vector-borne disease, more

many developing countries there is a lack of so-

flooding, and exacerbation of land degradation

cial safety nets and other protections that can help

(see Box 3).

soften the impacts of environmental disasters on

19

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

the poor. Informal institutions such as local so-

national policy to prevent civil conflict more ef-

cial networks also are important, and their den-

fectively (World Bank, 2001a).

sity and capacity can underpin the ability of the poor to cope.

6

In some cases, natural resource conflicts can be so severe that they contribute to wider unrest and can affect the political stability of a country.

Crisis and conflict

In Burundi and Rwanda, there is some evidence that intense population pressure combined with

Tensions between diverse interest groups over

limited land resources contributed to the ethnic

natural resources can contribute to conflict.

tension that led to full-scale civil war (ACTS,

These tensions may be played out at the region-

2000). And there is evidence that some of the en-

al level, as can be seen in the water conflicts in

during conflicts in other African countries—for

the Middle East; at the national level, as in the

example, in Angola, Democratic Republic of the

competition for control of diamonds in Sierra

Congo, Liberia, and Sudan—have arisen from

Leone; and at the local level over access to nat-

competing desires to control rich natural resourc-

ural resources on which the poor directly de-

es, including conflict among elites over control

pend for their livelihoods (DFID, 2000a). In such

of profits from natural resource exploitation, or

circumstances, the poor will be the most nega-

that such exploitation has provided funds for

tively affected because they have the fewest re-

conflict to continue (ACTS, 2000; Oxfam, 2002;

sources to cope with physical loss, and they are

Göeteborg University, 2002).7

the most vulnerable to violence and lack appropriate means for legal redress.

New research suggests that civil wars more often are fueled by rebel groups competing with

1.4 Economic growth and the environment

national governments for control of diamonds, coffee, and other valuable primary commodities

The links between growth, economic policies, and

than by political, ethnic, or religious differences.

the environment are important for poverty reduc-

Analysis of 47 civil wars from 1960 to 1999 shows

tion in two inter-related ways:

that countries that earn about a quarter of their yearly gross domestic product (GDP) from the

20

Countries can have high levels of growth

export of unprocessed commodities face a far

and improved environmental performance.

higher likelihood of civil war than countries with

There is no simple tradeoff between growth

more diversified economies. Since conflict pre-

and the environment—countries with

vention efforts have paid relatively little atten-

similar levels of income and growth can

tion to these issues, there would seem to be

have quite different levels of environmen-

considerable scope for both domestic and inter-

tal performance.

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

Ignoring the environmental soundness of

growth—even if this leads to short-run economic gains—can hurt the poor in the

Water quality tends to improve with rising income

Air pollution from sulfur dioxide tends to

short term and undermine long-run

first get worse with rising income, but then

growth and its effectiveness in reducing

decline

poverty.

Emissions of carbon dioxide tend to continue to grow with income, although

The quality of growth matters

not uniformly so (World Bank, 1992).

Current strategies for poverty alleviation are fun-

These are comparisons across country in-

damentally built upon premises of economic

come groups, but countries at similar income and

growth. A wealth of empirical evidence reveals

growth levels show large differences in environ-

that economic growth, as commonly measured

mental performance. These differences are largely

in increases of real GDP, is necessary but not suf-

a function of a country’s policy and regulatory

ficient to reduce the number of people living in

framework and institutional capacity. Thus, while

poverty—equally important is the equitable dis-

this type of un-weighted, simple index only

tribution of growth (World Bank, 2001f).

partially covers the concept of environmental

Critical to discussing economic growth as it

quality, it serves to illustrate a fundamental

relates to environmental impact and poverty is

point—there is not a simple tradeoff between

the consideration of the quality of growth. The

growth and environment.

same rate of growth in an economy can be associated with widely different environmental im-

Ignoring the environment can

pacts, as seen in Figure 4. Depicted on the y-axis

undermine long-term growth

are changes in environmental quality based upon an environmental quality index measuring

While there is no simple relationship between

changes in water pollution and air pollution dur-

growth and environment, there are many exam-

ing the 1980s and deforestation over the 1980s

ples of how bad environmental management is

8

and 1990s. The higher the position on the y-axis,

bad for growth. These short-run growth paths are

the more a country’s environmental quality rank-

bad for long-run growth, but also have high so-

ing has improved.

cial and environmental costs that disproportion-

As economies grow, their environmental per-

ately affect the poor. Some examples include:9

formance tends to deteriorate or improve depending on what variable is considered.

Collapse or near collapse of fisheries in

Comparing across countries at different income

many countries in both the industrial and

levels:

the developing world—for example, the

21

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Economic growth and environmental quality (1981–98) F I G U R E 4

Change in environmental quality (rank index) 60

50

40

30

20

10

0 –2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

GDP growth (percent per year)

Source: World Bank, 2000c.

22

cod fishery in the North Atlantic and the

estimated that about 16 percent of the

Argentina hake fishery. The latter was

country is subject to salinization from low-

overfished by about double the maximum

quality groundwater provided by

sustainable yield in the late 1990s (UNEP,

tubewells and excessive water application.

2002a).

The damage from salinization costs the

Decline of agriculture due to salinization

country over US$200 million per year in

from irrigation in several countries—for

reduced yields (World Bank, 1996b).

example in Pakistan, where it has been

Another example of unsustainable irriga-

Why the Environment Matters to People Living in Poverty

tion was the draining of the Aral Sea to

introduction of diseased animals. Disease

grow cotton, which has cost the region

caused financial losses of over US$1 billion

millions of dollars.

in Asia in the 1990s. In addition, there were

Downstream impacts due to upstream

costs of land degradation, human health

land use change—the linkages between

impacts, and mangrove destruction—

land use and downstream siltation and

estimated to be over 20 percent of revenues

flooding are complex, but there is some

in Bangladesh (UNEP, 1999). The shrimp

evidence of the connection. For example,

industry in Latin America is now being

the Chinese government has concluded

threatened by these same pathogens

that the severe flooding of 1998 was

(Bartley, 1999).

caused in large measure by deforestation

in the Yangtze River’s watershed (World

Thus environmental improvement is not a

Bank, 2002d). The reduction of forests on

luxury preoccupation that can wait until growth

slopes in Central America was found to

has alleviated income poverty, nor can it be as-

contribute significantly to the October

sumed that growth itself will take care of envi-

1998 floods and mudslides caused by

ronmental problems over the longer term as

Hurricane Mitch, which killed nearly

incomes rise and more resources are available for

18,000 people (Girot, 2000).

environmental protection. To improve the envi-

Decline in exports of intensively farmed

ronmental soundness of growth, economic poli-

commercial aquaculture operations, in

cies and decisionmaking need to better reflect the

particular shrimp farming due primarily to

“public goods” nature of many environmental

disease from pollution and poor environ-

goods and services by addressing the persistent

mental controls—for example, the Taiwan-

policy and market failures that lead to their un-

ese shrimp industry collapsed after the

dervaluation and misuse.

23

P A R T

2

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

P

art 2 looks at policy opportunities to reduce poverty by improving the environment. Given the complex and multidimensional nature of poverty-environment linkages, it is inevitable that this encompasses a broad agenda for policy

and institutional change across many sectors. We have grouped these issues into four main areas of policy action (see Figure 5).

Experience demonstrates that, with judicious policymaking, significant “win-win” opportunities exist to reduce poverty by improving the environment.10 If better environmental management can contribute

to poverty reduction, how can these opportunities be taken and what is preventing their wider adoption?

Many of the underlying causes of poverty and environmental degradation are related to issues of governance and politics. There are significant and often deeply entrenched policy and institutional barriers—at local, national, and global levels—that work against the interests of poor and marginalized groups, and that often create incentives to cause or overlook damage to the environment.

The decade of experience since the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio reveals some important lessons that help point the way forward. Three broad lessons are highlighted here:

25

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Key areas for policy action to improve poverty-environment outcomes F I G U R E

• • • Improve governance

5

• • • • • •

Enhance the assets of the poor

• • •

Improve the quality of growth

• • •

Integrate poverty-environment issues into national development frameworks Strengthen decentralization for environmental management Empower civil society, in particular poor and marginalized groups Address gender dimensions of poverty-environment issues Strengthen anti-corruption efforts to protect the environment and the poor Reduce environment-related conflict Improve poverty-environment monitoring and assessment.

Strengthen resource rights of the poor Enhance the poor's capacity to manage the environment Expand access to environmentally-sound and locallyappropriate technology Reduce the environmental vulnerability of the poor.

Integrate poverty-environment issues into economic policy reforms Increase the use of environmental valuation Encourage appropriate private sector involvement in pro-poor environmental management Implement pro-poor environmental fiscal reform.

•

Reform international and industrial country policies

26

Reform international and industrial country trade policies • Make foreign direct investment more pro-poor and pro-environment • Enhance the contribution of multilateral environmental agreements to poverty reduction • Encourage sustainable consumption and production • Enhance the effectiveness of development cooperation and debt relief.

First and foremost, poor people must be

assumptions and oversimplifications

seen as part of the solution rather than

concerning the poor and their relationship

part of the problem. Efforts to improve

to the environment. Pro-poor environ-

environmental management in ways that

mental management means challenging

contribute to sustainable growth and

orthodoxies that blame the poor for

poverty reduction should begin with the

environmental degradation, and challeng-

priorities of the poor. In many cases,

ing policies that protect the environment at

policies continue to be based on uncertain

the expense of poor people’s livelihoods. A

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

considerable body of evidence now exists

ways of dealing with conflicting interests

that supports an improved understanding

and tradeoffs, but they require more

of poverty-environment interactions, in

participatory, transparent, and accountable

particular how environmental conditions

policy and decisionmaking processes to

affect the poor and their access to environ-

ensure their credibility and longer-term

11

mental assets (see Box 4). Supportive policies and institutions are needed,

effectiveness.

Environmental management cannot be

including access to information and

treated separately from other development

decisionmaking, to expand the poor’s

concerns, but requires integration into

opportunities to invest in environmental

poverty reduction and sustainable devel-

improvements and enhance their liveli-

opment efforts. Improving environmental

hoods. At the same time, however, it is

management in ways that benefit the poor

essential to address the activities of the

requires policy and institutional changes

non-poor, since they are the source of most

that cut across sectors and lie mostly

environmental damage.

outside the control of environmental

The spatial and temporal tradeoffs and

institutions—changes in governance,

competing economic and political interests

domestic economic policy, and interna-

that often underlie environmental manage-

tional policies.

ment decisions and practices need to be addressed in ways that involve and benefit the poor. Developing countries can face

2.1 Improving governance

difficult choices in allocating scarce resources among pressing development needs, and the environment is often viewed as a longer-term concern that must be

Key areas for policy action:

traded off to address short-term needs (as has often been the case in industrial

national development frameworks

countries). At the same time, many examples are known where efforts to protect

Empower civil society, in particular poor and marginalized groups

marginalized groups and have left them worse off. For example, elite groups might

Strengthen decentralization for environmental management

the environment have not taken into account the priorities of poor and

Integrate poverty-environment issues into

Address gender dimensions of povertyenvironment issues

be concerned with wildlife protection to

Strengthen anti-corruption efforts to protect the environment and the poor

conserve national or global biodiversity,

Reduce environment-related conflict

while poorer villagers prioritize wild

Improve poverty-environment monitoring

bushmeat for protein. There are rational

and assessment.

27

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

BOX 4

An improved understanding of poverty-environment relationships

Most environmental degradation is caused by the non-poor: Most environmental degradation is caused by the non-poor as a result of their production and consumption levels, which are much higher than those of the poor, particularly in the highly industrialized countries. Even where poor people degrade the environment, this is often due to the poor being denied their rights to natural resources by wealthier elites and, in many cases, being pushed onto marginal lands more prone to degradation.

Population growth does not necessarily lead to increased degradation: While increasing population undoubtedly places greater pressure on productive land and resources, it is not necessarily population per se that causes the damage. The complex of locally specific social, economic, environmental, and governance circumstances in which population increases take place—which in turn can be strongly influenced either positively or negatively by external economic and political forces—are the primary driving forces behind poverty-environment interactions. Indeed, conventional economic theory would suggest that as population increases and land becomes scarcer, the land should increase in value and merit greater care and investment. Research in Kenya has documented cases where, even in the face of increasing population pressures, farmers have managed semiarid, degraded, unproductive lands in a manner that has rehabilitated them and made them profitable (Tiffen, Mortimore, and Gichuki, 1994). A wider review shows that for population growth to lead to improved soil and water investments, market access and attractive producer prices are essential, as well as social and economic support to prevent the collapse of social structures (Boyd and Slaymaker, 2000). In many areas, these conditions will not be present, and population growth will increase pressure on the environment.

The poor are capable of investing in environmental improvement: The conventional wisdom has been that poor people are too impoverished to mobilize resources for enhancing the environment. In some cases this is true. But numerous experiences demonstrate that when incentives are favorable, low-income households and social groups can mobilize enormous resources, particularly labor. There are many well-documented cases of poor people investing their own time and resources in environmental management, and succeeding in maintaining production and profitability while keeping their families and communities from the worst effects of poverty.a For example, many urban environmental problems can most effectively be solved when poor communities mobilize themselves or form coalitions with less-poor groups to improve service provision, often with some contribution in cash or kind (Hardoy, Mitlin, and Satterthwaite, 2001).

Poor people often have the technical knowledge for resource management: It is often assumed that a lack of technical knowledge is a key constraint to poor people’s management of natural resources. Indeed, when poor people move to areas with new ecological conditions, or when something happens to change the balance under which their resource management practices developed, a period of adjustment is required. Evidence is increasingly showing that poor people have an enormous store of indigenous technical knowledge—for example, environmentally sound cultivation practices, efficient water harvesting techniques, and myriad uses for medicinal plants. This knowledge is often undervalued or completely ignored.

a. For some examples, see the Poverty and Environment Initiative (UNDP and EC, 1999a-1999g); Reij and Waters-Bayer, 2001; and the Equator Initiative at www.EquatorInitiative.org (for examples of communities simultaneously reducing poverty and protecting biodiversity).

28

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

Poor people are quite capable of sustaining and improving their own livelihoods as long as

mestic and external resources are being allocated and effectively targeted.

they have adequate opportunities to make a liv-

All countries have some form of national

ing, a voice in decisions that affect them, and

strategic planning process. At the 1995 World

recourse to justice to defend their rights. Im-

Summit for Social Development, governments

proved governance—including an active civil

committed themselves to developing more ex-

society and open, transparent, and accountable

plicitly pro-poor policy frameworks through the

policy and decisionmaking processes—is often

preparation or strengthening of national strate-

the missing link in creating a more enabling

gies to reduce poverty. In 1999, the World Bank

policy and institutional environment to address

and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) made

poverty-environment issues that matter to the

Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) the

poor. Addressing governance issues at both na-

basis for debt forgiveness and new concessional

tional and sub-national levels is vital. Politi-

lending.12 Nationally owned poverty reduction

cians, the judiciary, the civil service, and the

strategies, including the PRSP process, provide

private sector all have a role to play as the state

a critical entry point for incorporating relevant

directly controls access to many natural re-

poverty-environment issues and ways to tackle

sources or determines the rules for resource use,

them into a country’s mainstream development

controls investments for environmental infra-

policy framework.

structure, and creates the framework for public

Although poverty reduction strategies are

policy debate about poverty-environment

intended to reflect the poor’s priorities, issues

issues.

that matter most to the poor, including povertyenvironment links, have often been overlooked

Integrate poverty-environment

or received inadequate attention. Recent environ-

issues into national development

mental reviews of PRSPs prepared in 40 coun-

frameworks

tries found that some, such as Bolivia, Honduras, Mozambique, Nicaragua, and Uganda (see Box

Poverty-environment issues need to be integrat-

5), have made a significant effort to address the

ed into mainstream development planning and

issues of improved natural resource manage-

resource allocation processes—including nation-

ment, better environmental health, and disaster

al development plans and budgets, poverty re-

preparedness. In most other countries, however,

duction strategies, and sector plans and budgets.

these issues have not been adequately addressed

This is necessary in order to forge a broad-based

in the context of poverty reduction planning

and more coordinated response to poverty-envi-

(DFID, 2002b; Bojö and Reddy, 2002).

ronment challenges, to achieve synergy between

Even where environmental matters are ade-

diverse interventions across many sectors and

quately addressed in PRSPs, considerable work

levels of action, and to ensure that adequate do-

still needs to be done to ensure that Medium-Term

29

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Funding more rural health clinics without invest-

BOX 5

Integrating environment in Uganda’s Poverty Eradication Action Plan

ments to reduce environmental health hazards is not cost-effective. All relevant sectoral policies need to be assessed to ensure that environmental

In early 2000, Uganda’s Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) was updated. Early drafts of the revision contained little recognition of environmental issues and long-term sustainability. For example, the focus in energy policy was on electrification, although fuelwood accounts for 96 percent of domestic energy supply. The National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) engaged in the process by producing a series of amendments and additions that were incorporated into the strategy. Other parts of the Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment submitted their own PEAP amendments once the influence of the NEMA initiative became known. Since the PEAP was adopted, NEMA has been engaged in following up on sectoral plans, such as the Plan for the Modernization of Agriculture, and in identifying poverty-environment indicators to monitor implementation.

opportunities to help the poor have not been overlooked (Yaron and White, 2002).

At the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, governments made a commitment to adopting national strategies for sustainable development, which is reflected in the Millennium Development Goals (e.g., Goal 7 on “ensuring environmental sustainability”). The UN has prepared guidance to assist countries in preparing a sustainable development strategy (UNDESA, 2002), and the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has prepared similar guidelines for development agency support to such processes (OECD, 2001c).14 Each country needs to determine its own strategy process. The challenge is to seek convergence between poverty and sustainable develop-

Source: DFID, 2000b.

ment strategies and to avoid the continuing tendency of donors to promote multiple and competing strategy frameworks. Where poverty reExpenditure Plans and sectoral plans and bud-

duction strategies adhere to their stated

gets contain adequate and properly directed re-

principles, including the integration of relevant

sources for investment in the environmental

environmental issues, then this can be considered

13

30

management concerns of the poor. Promoting

a national strategy for sustainable development

commercial farming that drains a wetland with-

(OECD, 2001c; DFID, 2000c).15

out thinking of the effect this will have on its cur-

A greater emphasis on cross-sectoral ap-

rent users is shortsighted and may have a

proaches does not imply a less significant role

negative impact on the poor. Promoting an ener-

for Environment Ministries and natural resource-

gy policy that focuses only on electrification,

related agencies, nor does it reduce the need for

which the poor cannot afford and so will remain

adequate funding, staffing, and training to carry

dependent on fuelwood, is counterproductive.

out their policy and regulatory mandates. How-

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

ever, it does mean that environmental organiza-

vesting, grazing, and industrial emissions—are

tions—including in civil society—need to under-

generally issued by local government. In cities,

stand better how environmental conditions affect

up to half of urban land is commonly in the pub-

the poor and the ways in which environmental

lic domain as public buildings, public infrastruc-

management can contribute to poverty reduction.

ture, and land (e.g., roads, railways, canals). The

It also means that environmental organizations

way local government chooses to use this land

should engage more effectively with Ministries

affects where industry locates, how congested a

of Planning and Finance or other agencies driv-

city is, where people live, and how the city will

ing the national planning process to ensure that

develop (DFID, 2001).

poverty-environment issues are addressed. In

Decentralization and local empowerment is

most cases, this shift in orientation will require a

not a guarantee for environmental stewardship.

reassessment of environmental management

While greater local government control has in

mandates and capacity development needs.

some cases made decisionmaking more responsive and accountable, this is by no means guar-

Strengthen decentralization

anteed. Local governments can be subject to the

for environmental management

same “capture” by wealthy elites as central government; they can also manage local resources

With the trend toward greater decentralization

unsustainably to raise revenue and may have

and devolution in many countries, planning is

weaker environmental management capacity

increasingly being undertaken at provincial, dis-

than central governments. In addition, decen-

trict, and local levels. For example, countries such

tralization has often been undermined when

as Malawi, Tanzania, Egypt, and Sri Lanka have

central governments have not provided suffi-

introduced district-level environmental planning.

cient resource transfers or revenue-raising pow-

While this is an important development, it is vi-

ers for local governments to implement their

tal that these environmental plans are integrated

responsibilities.

into the mainstream local planning process. It is

Further, not all stakeholders have compati-

also important that these plans focus on issues

ble objectives, and degrees of power and influ-

that are relevant to poor people—approaching

ence can differ, often significantly. This can lead

the topics from their perspective rather than only

to conflicts when poorer and more marginalized

from an environmental perspective.

groups are left out of the process or when suc-

Decentralization in rural areas has given lo-

cess encourages others to enter. Hence, efforts to

cal governments control over many key natural

empower communities to manage natural re-

resources—such as state land—and responsibil-

sources locally should safeguard against elite

ity for infrastructure such as water supply, sani-

capture and should build local capacity for par-

tation, and irrigation. Rules on resource

ticipatory management (UNDP and EC, 2000).

access—such as permits for mining, timber har-

Also, devolution of power to the local level can

31

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

increase pressure on natural resources in view of

states of West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh were

the income, employment, and revenue needs of

instrumental in promoting greater joint manage-

local government and their constituents. Hence,

ment by the poor of forestry resources (Lele,

when tradeoffs between environmental conser-

2001). In several Latin American cities, progres-

vation and poverty reduction are resolved local-

sive mayors and city councils have had a major

ly, they may result in short-term exploitation. This

impact in improving the access of the poor to

can be mitigated by two factors, however. First,

environmental infrastructure (Hardoy, Mitlin,

local resource control also means that the bene-

and Satterthwaite, 2001).

fits of sustainable management will accrue local-

Strengthening civil society’s role in environ-

ly. Second, financial transfers from the outside,

mental management, particularly among poor

for example through nationally directed subsi-

and marginalized groups, requires access to en-

dies or international funding sources such as the

vironmental information, to decisionmaking pro-

Global Environment Facility (GEF), can make a

cesses, and to adequate means of redress through

big difference as to how these tradeoffs are

the justice system.

resolved.

16

Public access to information is vital for effective environmental management. A free media

Empower civil society, in particular

has been instrumental in highlighting environ-

poor and marginalized groups

mental problems in both the public and the private sectors. In some countries, the state has

32

Civil society organizations, including organiza-

effectively used public pressure by making in-

tions of the poor, have a key role in promoting

formation publicly available in order to encour-

sound and equitable environmental manage-

age greater pollution compliance (see Box 6). This

ment. Farmers groups, community groups, reli-

also applies to rural areas. In the Philippines, for

gious organizations, trade unions, professional

example, access to information has contributed

associations, and public interest organizations

to community monitoring of forestry offenses and

can be instrumental in raising awareness of en-

the enforcement of forest regulations (Brunner et

vironmental issues, in helping poor people to

al., 2000).

secure their access to natural resources and envi-

The participation of poor and marginalized

ronmental infrastructure, and in monitoring the

groups in policy and planning processes is es-

performance and accountability of government,

sential to ensuring that the key environmental

the private sector, and international agencies. In

issues that affect them are adequately addressed.

this context, there is a need for enhanced cooper-

It also fosters commitment to implementation of

ation between environmental, social develop-

environmental policies and interventions. The

ment, and human rights groups. Where

effective participation of these groups depends

government is responsive, it can have a major

on a number of factors, however. The participa-

impact. In India, reformist governments in the

tory mechanisms put in place should be sensi-

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

BOX 6

Indonesia’s Program for Pollution Control, Evaluation, and Rating (PROPER)

institutions that are accountable to the poor, so that monitoring of action and enforcement of rights can take place at all levels. Citizen oversight boards, community-level review processes

The Indonesian environment agency, BAPEDAL, introduced PROPER in early 1995 and focused on 187 of the worst water polluters. The Vice President presided over a high-profile ceremony to congratulate the one-third of companies that met the regulations, while BAPEDAL privately notified the remaining two-thirds that they were noncompliant and had six months to go before public disclosure.

Following full disclosure, the program had by mid-1997 reduced pollution by 40 percent. Indonesia is now expanding the program to 2,000 plants. Other countries have learned from this approach and similar schemes are now under way in the Philippines, Mexico, and Colombia, and are planned in China and Venezuela.

Source: World Bank, 2000a.

for government development plans and projects, and ombudsman systems for dispute resolution are examples of such mechanisms. It is also important to strengthen the judicial system as an impartial and independent institution, and to foster the emergence of institutions of civil society that can mediate between different actors (UNDP and EC, 2000).

Address gender dimensions of poverty-environment issues Gender roles and relationships in environmental management and access to environmental assets are a key dimension of the poverty-environment nexus and must be taken into account for effective policy and program design (OECD, 2001a).

Women play a critical and often primary role in

tive to the resource constraints of poor people,

food production and natural resource man-

should increase their access to environmental

agement activities. Rigid gender roles can con-

information, and should enhance transparency

tribute to inefficiencies in natural resource

and accountability in order to convince poor peo-

management (World Bank, 2001b), and equity

ple that their views will be considered and given

between women and men in gaining access to

due weight in decisionmaking.

natural resources is essential to improving food

Poor and marginalized groups often lack ac-

security and livelihoods. And, as described in

cess to environmental justice in order to address

Part 1, women are at higher risk and more vul-

environmental abuses and to protect their rights.

nerable than men to many environmental haz-

At the same time, governments often do not have

ards because of their particular social and

the resources to monitor in a timely and effective

economic roles.

manner the resources and services that the poor

To date, poverty-environment links that mat-

depend on, particularly in remoter rural areas.

ter to poor women—such as lack of land and re-

Governments need to support representation by

source rights, the additional disease burden from

33

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

indoor air pollution, and the time and physical burden of collecting fuelwood and water—have been given very little recognition in most PRSPs.

BOX 7

Tackling corruption in the Cambodian forestry sector

Existing gender analysis methods and tools should be employed to ensure that poverty reduction strategies, policy and budget frameworks, and monitoring systems reflect a more gender-disaggregated understanding of povertyenvironment concerns and needed policy and institutional responses.

Strengthen anti-corruption efforts to protect the environment and the poor Corruption is a general governance problem, but it relates strongly to poor environmental management, especially concerning the extraction of natural resources, the regulation of pollution, and the preference for lucrative hardware solutions (for example, the power and water sectors) over softer solutions like efficiency savings. The En-

Cambodia’s Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy states: “controlling illegal logging, combined with measures already taken to restructure the forestry concession system, will begin to mobilize the revenue potential of the forestry sector which will become an important source of finance for poverty reduction measures in agricultural and other sectors.” It is estimated that about US$100 million is lost each year from corruption, compared with only about US$13 million that is captured. The Forest Crime Unit, supported by the international nongovernmental group Global Witness, has been very blunt about drawing attention to the lack of action against illegal loggers. Faced with mounting domestic and international criticism, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen announced the suspension of all logging operations as of January 2002.

Source: Hodess, 2001.

vironmental Sustainability Index found that the variable that most correlated with poor environmental performance was corruption.17

34

The provision and effective dissemination of

consultations between the Parties to the Agree-

good-quality information, combined with an ap-

ment, and require the relevant Party to take the

propriate legal and regulatory framework and the

measures necessary to remedy the situation im-

eventual imposition of adequate sanctions, can

mediately. In some cases, sanctions may be im-

improve the situation. Pressure can be brought

posed, such as suspension of aid.

to bear by national and international civil soci-

While developing countries have a major role

ety, by international buyers and consumers, by

to play in stamping out corruption, industrial

donors, and by other governments (see Box 7).

countries also can play a part—as they may be

For example, according to Article 97 of the Coto-

home to the briber. The OECD Bribery Conven-

nou Agreement between the European Union and

tion, which recently entered into force, requires

ACP (African, Caribbean, and Pacific) countries,

member-states to introduce legislation that makes

serious cases of corruption should give rise to

bribery of a “foreign public official” a criminal

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

offense, including public officials of non-Parties

local populations depend on for their livelihoods

to the Convention. Many OECD countries, such

and well-being (Lewis, 1996; Ghimire and Pim-

as the US and the UK, have passed such legisla-

bert, 1997; Buckles, 1999).

tion. There is also a desire by some industrial-

Control over natural resource rents—partic-

country governments and businesses to agree to

ularly oil and other minerals—can cause conflict

multilateral rules that require public disclosure

between local residents, governments, and pri-

of the amount of rent taxes they are handing over

vate extractors. In some cases, there also can be

to developing-country governments for legal ex-

tension between the local district where the min-

ploitation—often for oil—in order to ensure that

erals are located and central government—which

this money does not disappear.

may get much of the revenue—an issue that has arisen in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, and Ni-

Reduce environment-related conflict

geria. There is no easy solution to these problems, but they must be addressed by attempts to reach

Environmental conflict is an issue at the micro

a political settlement on the appropriate and

and intermediate levels (e.g., pastoralists versus

transparent sharing of resource revenues, based

settled farmers, river basin users) and at a macro

on public debate.

level (e.g., over control of diamonds and timber).

In more extreme cases, natural resources may

At the micro and intermediate levels, conflict res-

fuel war, and they often provide the funds and

olution structures are needed that provide a fo-

incentives to prolong conflicts once they have

rum for informed dialogue to solve problems. For

started. This has been the case in West Africa and

example, river basin management authorities are

Southeast Asia. The underlying cause for the con-

being set up in many countries to establish and

flict needs to be addressed, but in the meantime

support dialogue and management rules between

pressure from the international community—

different resource users. In some cases, the open

governments, civil society, and consumers—can

access nature of many resources—land, fisheries,

reduce the potential gains from resource extrac-

forests—needs to be altered to stop overuse,

tion. The Kimberley diamond certification pro-

which can lead to conflict. Local-level efforts to

cess is one such attempt, as is pressure by the UN

define appropriate management regimes need to

Security Council to highlight natural resource ex-

be supported. This can be complex, as it is im-

traction in the Democratic Republic of the Con-

portant not to exclude poor people. For exam-

go (see Box 8).

ple, while many protected areas are being managed with more involvement of local peo-

Improve poverty-environment

ple, there are numerous examples of protected

monitoring and assessment

areas that lack effective mechanisms to facilitate local community participation and to resolve

Improving environmental management to re-

conflicts over access to ‘protected’ resources that

duce poverty requires local understanding of

35

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

BOX 8

Natural resources fuel conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

toring systems. Environmental data tend to focus on environmental change without determining poverty effects, while poverty monitoring systems often ignore environmental concerns.

In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the link between conflict and natural resources is now so explicit that in 2001 the UN Security Council asked the Secretary-General to set up a special expert panel on the illegal exploitation of natural resources and other forms of wealth in that country. The panel argued in its first report that there is “a pattern of continued exploitation carried out by numerous state and non-state actors, including rebel forces and armed groups, conducted behind various facades in order to conceal the true nature of the activities.” The only loser in this huge business venture is the Congolese people.

Following a December 2001 debate on the panel’s conclusions, its mandate was extended to include an update of information from all relevant countries; an evaluation of possible actions that could be taken by the Security Council in order to help end plundering; recommendations on specific actions that the international community might take in support of the Congolese government; and recommendations on possible steps that might be taken by transit countries, as well as by end-users, to contribute to ending illegal exploitation of natural resources.

Source: UN, 2001.

Indicators are needed that measure how environmental conditions affect the livelihoods, health, and vulnerability of the poor, and these need to be integrated into national poverty monitoring systems and assessment.18 Some work is already under way to identify useful generic poverty-environment indicators, but the real need is to collect data in-country.19 Surveys in Nepal, Honduras, and Uganda (Nunan et al, 2002) and in Nigeria (Osuntogun, 2002) show that some data are already available.

Generally, environmental health data are currently the most widely available, drawing from Ministry of Health and household survey sources.

However, the extent to which certain health outcomes such as malaria can be reduced by environmental interventions requires further research. There are some qualitative data on natural resources and vulnerability from participatory poverty assessments (PPAs), but future PPAs could be designed with a more explicit focus on key poverty-environment issues (Brocklesby and Hinshelwood, 2001). Household and community-level data on the poor’s dependence on natural resources are sometimes available for a particular sector, such as forestry, often as part of preparing forestry sector and biodiversity

36

how environmental conditions relate to pover-

strategies. Work has also been undertaken to

ty, and the ability to identify and set priorities

overlay poverty data with existing environmen-

on alternative policy options and evaluate their

tal data to form “poverty-environment maps”

effectiveness and impact. This, in turn, requires

that identify the spatial links between poverty

appropriate and effective indicators and moni-

and resource degradation (Henninger and

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

Hammond, 2000).20 While this suggests that data

asset base of the poor. Assets include natural cap-

may be more available than is realized, they are

ital (land, forests, water, fish, energy resources,

scattered among different agencies, not collected

and minerals); social capital (relationships of trust

systematically, and often require careful analy-

and reciprocity, groups, networks, customary

sis and interpretation to develop the relevance

law); human capital (skills, knowledge, beliefs,

for poverty-environment issues.

attitudes, labor ability, and good health); physi-

As with any indicators, the information col-

cal capital (basic infrastructure such as water

lected is only useful to the extent that it is ap-

supply and sanitation services); and financial

ropriately used. Poverty-environment data

capital (monetary resources). Supportive policies

collection should build on existing efforts, such

and institutional arrangements are needed to

as those associated with livelihood surveys and

enhance the assets of the poor and their capabil-

PPAs, and should be anchored in institutions with

ities to meet basic needs and to create more flex-

appropriate skills, such as the Statistics Depart-

ible and secure livelihood options.

ment, Ministry of Finance, or a competent local research institute. These institutions have expe-

Strengthen resource rights

rience in producing demand-led data and will

of the poor

make it more likely that the data are fed into ongoing poverty-related policy processes such as

Property rights to resources such as land, water,

poverty reduction strategies and sectoral and

and trees play a fundamental role in the pover-

spatial plans and programs.

21

ty-environment nexus (UNDP and EC, 2000).22 Property rights encompass a diverse set of tenure rules and other aspects of resource access and

2.2 Enhancing the assets of the poor

use, and strongly influence the patterns of natural resource management. They may either facilitate or impede sustainable use, protection, or

Key areas for policy action:

Strengthen resource rights of the poor

Enhance the poor’s capacity to manage the environment

Expand access to environmentally sound and locally appropriate technology

Reduce the environmental vulnerability of the poor

resource-improving investment.

Individual and collective property rights held by poor people represent key household and community assets that may provide income opportunities and access to credit, the ability to meet essential household subsistence needs, or a means of insurance against livelihood risk. Poorer people tend to rely more heavily on customary or informal rights that are not adhered to by

Many policy options for addressing poverty-

outside user groups. Marginalized users, such as

environment interactions focus on improving the

poor women, often lose out as a result of policies

37

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

and processes that privatize and reduce complex

that do not meet the criterion of private exclu-

bundles of rights into a single unitary right (un-

sivity and yet function to the satisfaction of the

der many land and water reforms). Uncertain

included parties and have proved to be sustain-

ownership conditions can also affect long-term

able (Ostrom, 1990; Ostrom et al, 1999). There are

agricultural productivity and incentives for re-

also strong concerns that a shift toward privati-

source conservation and investment, and can es-

zation would be contrary to poverty alleviation:

pecially cause rapid deterioration of lands or

the rich tend to be the largest landowners after

natural resources when the owner tries to squeeze

common land is privatized.24 Where traditional

out the maximum revenue during a short peri-

common property management regimes have

od. This is also relevant in urban areas, where

broken down and fail to protect the poor, how-

insecure tenure in slums brings risks of demoli-

ever, the formal issuance of legal titles may be

tion and discourages investment to upgrade liv-

beneficial for the poor and for agricultural pro-

ing conditions.

23

ductivity, and may therefore create an incentive

Good examples are available of well-estab-

for investment in soil and water conservation (see

lished common-property management regimes

Box 9). Yet as perceived security and local enforce-

BOX 9

Land tenure and environmental improvements

The relationships between land tenure and environmental improvements in terms of afforestation and soil and water management in rural areas and also of investing in better housing in urban areas are complex and location-specific.

A study of 115 upland farms in the Philippines using six years of soil erosion data found that farmers who had high security of tenure were more likely to install contour hedgerows to reduce erosion. However, the study also found that adaptation was more likely with farms that had access to credit, and that larger farms were more likely to adapt than smaller farms. This suggests that while tenure is important, it is by no means the only factor that matters.

Studies from parts of Africa are less categorical—showing that while tenure is important, tenure security is not necessarily delivered by freehold titling. Tenure security is often a question of perception and interpretation of the socio-political climate in relation to land rights.

The relationship may also work the other way—with people either increasing or reducing tree cover to assert ownership. In some parts of Latin America, ownership of forested areas is asserted through replacing forest with crops, while there is some evidence of the reverse in parts of Africa. There, stronger tenure rights over communal land are sometimes granted to those who plant trees. This occurs in Ghana, where women plant cocoa on family land to assert ownership.

In urban areas, tenure is often vital for access to improved environmental services. Improving tenure is one of the indicators for monitoring the Millennium Development Goal on environmental sustainability. However, there is limited accurate information on this at present.

Source: Shively, 2001; DFID, 2002a; Shepherd, 1991; Quisumbing et al., 2001; Payne, 2002.

38

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

ment are critical concerns, such formal titling may

BOX 10

not be necessary if informal rules are honored.

Community forestry in Nepal

To strengthen the land rights of the poor, it

The 1993 Forest Act legalized forestry user groups, giving them the right to own the trees although ownership of the land remains with the State. User groups develop operational plans, set forest product sale prices, and determine how surplus income is spent. By June 1997, there were 6,000 user groups managing 450,000 hectares, with a further 6,000 waiting for formal registration. Issues still arise within user groups, between them, and with the Forest Department. Concerns have arisen about domination by local elites, politicization of user groups, and pressures from the Forest Department to focus on tree planting rather than harvesting. Nevertheless, experience has been encouraging, and the condition of the managed forests has often improved.

is necessary to reform the policies and institutions responsible for delivering land rights in order to make them more responsive to the poor’s needs. These include central government land agencies; local government; traditional authorities; the justice system; and local land boards, commissions, and tribunals.

Enhance the poor’s capacity to manage the environment Strengthening the resource rights of the poor is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for improving environmental management and people’s livelihoods. With the shift in many countries

Source: UNDP and EC, 1999f.

toward decentralization and devolution of environmental management responsibilities, greater emphasis should be given to strengthening local environmental management capacities by build-

Community wildlife reserves managed for

ing social and human capital, especially among

sport hunting in southern Africa have been

the poor. This is essential for decentralization

transformed into areas managed for conser-

processes to truly reflect and respond to the pri-

vation, where indigenous people’s liveli-

ority needs of the poor; otherwise, decentraliza-

hoods become a force for conservation.25

tion may serve to further concentrate power in

Water users associations that buy and sell

the hands of the local elite and to marginalize

water rights and organize for collective

poor and vulnerable groups even more (UNDP

system maintenance have been established.26

and EC, 2000).

being linked to international timber and

In rural and urban areas throughout the de-

certification markets.27

veloping world, a wide range of innovative approaches is being tried to empower local

Community-based forestry enterprises are

Cooperatives producing organic foods or

environmental management and to improve live-

coffee for domestic and international

lihood options. Many positive examples can be

markets have revitalized traditional agricul-

cited (see also Box 10):

tural systems with new technologies.28

39

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

In all these examples, the institutional frame-

Technology development and dissemination

work, including the building and use of social

for the poor is often not fully provided by the

capital, is a key element in success. Projects that

market, however. Because of its possible spill-over

successfully support such initiatives have in-

benefits, governments, civil society groups, the

cluded significant resources for human capital

poor themselves, and donors all have a role to play

development, organizational strengthening, ne-

to support innovation. Such shifts might be

gotiation and conflict resolution, and other insti-

brought about through introduction and demon-

tutional skills. Community-level organizations

stration projects that involve the full participation

have also developed relationships with higher-

of poor people. There have been attempts to fund

level institutions, and through them mobilized

labor-intensive environmental technology projects

support for their interests and advocated a posi-

through public works, especially “food for work”

tive policy environment for their activities (Bojö

programs. However, the ownership and ultimate

and Pagiola, 2000). This is needed because often

sustainability of works that have been carried out

the non-poor may be responsible for environmen-

with the incentive of an external supply of income

tal degradation—such as commercial trawlers

is usually questionable.

who cause overfishing or commercial loggers

In agriculture, much more success has been

who destroy forests—and local groups need

achieved by empowering innovative farmers to

government intervention to prevent this from

adopt and adapt new technologies and to pass

occurring.

their knowledge on to their peers (Reij and Waters-Beyer, 2001). Support should be provid-

Expand access to environmentally

ed to involve farmers in testing the suitability of

sound and locally appropriate

these new practices and the use of “farmer-to-

technology

farmer” advisory and training services, leading to the introduction of a number of different prac-

40

There is an abundance of “appropriate” technol-

tices that require little or no cash inputs—a very

ogies that can improve the environment and the

important feature when dealing with poor farm-

livelihoods of the poor. Many are based on local

ers (see Box 11). The practices can be based, for

traditional knowledge and practices; others are

example, on making the best use of rainfall and

the result of external technical innovation. Exam-

of waste products like animal manure and crop

ples include terracing, tied ridging to hold rain

residues and whatever other organic material can

water, grass bunds to reduce water runoff and

be found on the farm.

soil erosion, water harvesting techniques, agro-

Clean and affordable energy is essential both

forestry, the use of natural products to eliminate

for poverty reduction and for environmental pro-

pests, improved livestock and fish production,

tection. Most poor households and communities

and the use of reeds or woody plants to trap and

have no access to modern energy services, and

detoxify sewage.

for them the establishment of appropriate renew-

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

5 million and 2 million units respectively (Ven-

BOX 11

Improving resource-poor farmer’s access to environmentally sound technology

kata, 1997).

Electricity for home consumption is associated with clear environmental health benefits

In many cropping systems, heavy reliance on chemical pesticides is threatening the sustainability of agricultural production.

Small-scale farmers and the rural poor are disproportionately affected by the health and environmental impacts. Integrated pest management (IPM) has successfully provided poor farmers with a pest management technology they can afford. IPM is based on the farmer’s management of the ecosystem though a mix of ecologically sound pest control techniques, taking into consideration the social and economic aspects of the pest management decision. One of the largest-ever investments by a developing country in farmer training on IPM was the Indonesian IPM Training Project (1993–99). Over 600,000 rice, vegetable, and soybean farmers have been helped to make better pest management decisions on their own farms. The project induced institutional development far beyond its originally planned extent.

(Wang, 2002). It is a clean source of energy at the consumption stage, enables refrigeration, extends reading time, and supports modern communications. However, most poor people live in rural areas where the cost of grid-connection would be prohibitive. Off-grid, decentralized alternatives should be promoted for them.

The public sector needs to provide an enabling environment for energy technology enterprises and to direct support to research and demonstration projects. Experience shows that successful energy technology needs to be adapted to local circumstances and based on sustainable consumer demand. Nongovernmental organizations, community-level organizations, and private-sector entrepreneurs all have a role to play in developing locally appropriate technology that can also become financially sustain-

Source: World Bank, 2000b.

able in the long run.30 In the area of human health, there is tremendous need for improved cookstove technology to reduce indoor air pollution and associated

able options is critical. Increased use of renew-

acute respiratory infections. In the past, many

able energy sources in industry and transport will

such programs have failed, but there have been

be essential in order to meet the rising energy

countries where, especially in urban markets, the

demand from urban growth while maintaining

new technology has successfully taken off. In

air quality. Many cost-effective renewable tech-

Kenya and Ethiopia, for example, several million

nologies already exist, and they can contribute

improved stoves have been sold. The success of

29

to reducing air pollution considerably. For ex-

these programs stems from a number of factors,

ample, the two most populous developing coun-

including initial support from governments and

tries—China and India—are also home to the

donors, but also the successful, long-term involve-

largest small-scale biogas programs, with some

ment of small-scale private-sector entrepreneurs.

41

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

These producers have found a commercially via-

and the kind of environmental risks they face. For

ble niche, particularly in supplying urban poor

example, government attempts to improve

with an energy-saving appliance that also reduc-

storm-water drainage and relieve flooding in the

es indoor air pollution (ESD, 2000). The issue here,

slums of Indore, India, involved replacing open

as with all technologies, is to focus not just on the

drains with closed drainage channels, which

engineering side, but on the social, cultural, finan-

meant residents could no longer predict the se-

cial, and marketing aspects of technical change.

verity of the flood. Also, the closed drains were

Simple, low-cost technology is also available

more easily blocked by rubbish and could no

for better sanitation, but it should be introduced

longer be used to wash away excreta—thus the

in a culturally appropriate manner, along with

residents preferred the old system (WRI, 1996).

31

educational efforts. Similarly, simple technolo-

In many environmental disasters, the major-

gies exist for vector control to combat malaria,

ity of fatalities occur in the first 24 hours—long

including control of habitats where mosquitoes

before national and international agencies arrive

breed and the distribution of bednets treated with

on the scene. So engaging local residents in di-

insecticides.

32

saster preparedness, mitigation, and coping strategies is the only practical solution.

While natural hazards in general cannot be

Reduce the environmental vulnerability of the poor

prevented completely, their impacts and sometimes their magnitude can be managed. There are

The poor have many informal mechanisms to

four key approaches (ICRC, 2001):

manage the risks that they face every day. These include ways to reduce and mitigate risk (e.g.,

use of common property resources, temporary

hazards through measures discussed

migration, income diversification, and informal

elsewhere in this report. For example,

insurance) and to cope with shocks once they

floods are strongly influenced by land and

occur (e.g., sale of assets, reduced consumption,

water management in upper catchments of

and loans). These risk management strategies

watersheds. Good land use planning and

may be found at the individual, household, or

zoning can prevent a natural cycle of water

more collective level (World Bank, 2001f).

flows from becoming a catastrophe. Fire

State attempts to reduce the vulnerability of

breaks and early response can to some

the poor to natural disasters should strike a bal-

extent prevent wildfires from spreading.

ance between measures designed to prevent

Diverse crop varieties can reduce exposure

shocks that will adversely affect the poor and af-

to pathogen attacks.

ter-the-fact measures that reduce the impact of

42

Address the causes of environmental

Focus more on participatory risk reduc-

such shocks on poor and vulnerable groups or

tion, risk mitigation, and disaster pre-

enhance their ability to cope. Intervention strate-

paredness. Building codes for houses and

gies need to be based on the realities of the poor

other infrastructure can ensure that

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

buildings are equipped to withstand

than flying in foreign supplies and experts,

natural hazards to a reasonable degree.

which may be time-consuming and have

Early warning systems that effectively

lower benefits for the local economy. Relief

provide local people with adequate

efforts should focus on longer-term

information to minimize impacts can be

recovery through, for example, the intro-

very effective. Countries that have taken

duction of more income-earning opportu-

this approach have had a major impact. In

nities. This is constrained by both govern-

Bangladesh, following the 1991 cyclone

ment and development agencies which still

when 140,000 people died, a major effort

tend to separate disaster relief from long-

was put into local-level disaster prepared-

term development—so that relief is not

ness; since then fatalities have dropped

sufficiently development-oriented and

substantially (although thousands are still

development does not fully incorporate

made homeless). Even in the terrible 1999

disaster mitigation.

Orissa super-cyclone—when an estimated

Ensure that funds are available for dealing

10,000–40,000 people died—an additional

with disasters. While the international

40,000 were saved by locally constructed

community may provide some funds,

and managed shelters.

countries may find it more predictable to

After disasters have happened, improve

set up their own contingency reserves. A

response and relief efforts and ensure that

number of countries in Latin America have

they include a focus on improving liveli-

already begun this process. There is also a

hood opportunities that can withstand

need to increase private-sector insurance

future disasters. While the coordination of

coverage.

humanitarian relief has improved somewhat, it can improve further with greater

Once a disaster has struck, emergency re-

involvement of well-informed groups on

sponse management and delivery of rapid sup-

the ground. Funds are often more useful

port to affected areas is critical to reduce human

43

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

losses. Economic recovery requires a well-man-

Encourage appropriate private-sector

aged response with quick-disbursing funds for

involvement in pro-poor environmental

clearing of disturbed sites, reconstruction, re-

management

seeding of damaged cropland, micro-credit for commercial activities, and so forth.

33

Implement pro-poor environmental fiscal reform.

Addressing chronic long-term environmental vulnerability such as drought and pest infes-

More environmentally sound and equitable

tations is even more complex and, as it is less

patterns of economic growth are needed to pro-

visible, receives much less attention. Long-term

tect the environmental assets of the poor and to

solutions require addressing the reasons for en-

expand sustainable livelihood opportunities.

vironmental decline. In the short term, the key is

Environmental problems often arise because ef-

to understand the poor’s own coping strategies

fective market mechanisms do not exist or are

and motives. In rural areas, coping strategies of

insufficient. Hence, there is an important role for

the poor may include the introduction of drought-

government to complement economic policy re-

tolerant species, integrated pest management,

forms with measures to promote pro-poor envi-

and reduced dependence on declining natural

ronmental management. This includes the need

resources through shifting to off-farm employ-

to take better account of the economic values of

ment or in some cases migrating.

environmental goods and services ignored by

In urban areas, there is some evidence that

markets, in order to make rational and enlight-

the poor make short-term tradeoffs to accept cer-

ened choices possible. However, it is also impor-

tain environmental hazards—such as polluted

tant that governments correct the failures of their

slums—in order to improve their economic op-

own policies. This refers to reform of environ-

portunities (WRI, 1996). However, a wealth of

mentally harmful subsidies and the use of mar-

evidence point to the possibilities of mobilizing

ket-based instruments to improve environmental

the urban poor to upgrade their environment.

34

practices, as well as providing an enabling environment for private-sector involvement in environmental management when this can be done

2.3 Improving the quality of growth

efficiently and in the best social interest.

Integrate poverty-environment Key areas for policy action:

issues into economic policy reforms

Integrate poverty-environment issues

To promote macroeconomic stability and enhance

into economic policy reforms

growth, many countries have undergone struc-

Increase the use of environmental

tural adjustment reforms that include exchange

valuation

rate realignment, public-sector reform and priva-

44

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

tization, reduction of tariffs, and subsidy reform.

through chains of both positive and negative

The effect of these reforms on the environment is

repercussions, but quantifying the impacts re-

35

controversial and mixed. Positive environmen-

mains extremely difficult. Even after the imple-

tal impacts can occur when, for example, an over-

mentation of an economic adjustment program,

valued currency is adjusted so that domestic

it remains a challenge to define the “without

nature-based tourist services are promoted, or

scenario”—that is, what would have happened

when public subsidies to polluting industries are

in the absence of the reform program.36

dismantled. Adverse environmental effects can

Traditional economic models can include

occur when these reforms are undertaken in the

environmental components—for example, find-

context of unchanged institutional and market

ing out the effect of timber trade liberalization

failures. Trade liberalization can enhance export

on forest cover. But both traditional economic and

opportunities for natural resources such as for-

environmental analyses need to be adapted to our

ests, fisheries, and minerals. If these resources are

current concern: that greater attention be given

open-access, however, and if environmental reg-

to the impacts that disproportionately affect the

ulation and management regimes are ineffective,

poor. In some cases, countries are already start-

the repercussions may be quite negative from

ing to experiment with poverty-social impact

both an environmental and a poverty reduction

analysis of policy changes, and there is a need to

perspective.

ensure that relevant poverty-environment issues

Many countries have had to adjust unsus-

are also captured.

tainable economic polices, but there is a need to

This leads to the second important point:

complement such adjustment in two important

there is no substitute for targeted support to en-

ways. First, economic policy reforms need to be

vironmental management capacity in a reform-

complemented with assessments of their pov-

ing country. While not every impact of reform

erty-environment impacts. Traditional environ-

can be foreseen, certain environmental standards

mental impact assessment is now being adapted

and monitoring capabilities can respond to and

to address economic policy changes. Strategic

mitigate negative impacts that occur.

environmental assessment can be applied to sectoral and regional policies and programs to iden-

Increase the use of environmental

tify potential impacts and design mitigating

valuation

measures. Major deficiencies in environmental management can be identified and mitigation

Markets form the backbone of the global econom-

can be designed. For very broad macroeconom-

ic system, but they fail to capture many impor-

ic reforms, however, it becomes difficult to pre-

tant environmental values. This warrants

dict what the ultimate impact on the

attention both at the macroeconomic level, where

environment will be. As numerous case studies

social planning occurs, and at the microeconom-

have shown, the impacts often can be traced

ic level, where households and individuals make

45

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

small, everyday decisions that, taken together, profoundly affect environmental quality.

37

ital. Next, the depletion of nonrenewable ener-

To make rational choices when environmen-

gy sources, minerals, and forests are deducted.

tal and economic values are to be compared, it is

Finally, the damages from carbon dioxide emis-

essential that accounting systems and market

sions (as a proxy for overall air pollution) are

prices reflect the relevant values. At the macro-

deducted (World Bank, 2001e). This is illustrat-

economic level, this means that the traditional

ed in Figure 6, which shows a pronounced dif-

system of national accounting needs to be amend-

ference between the net domestic savings

ed to better reflect environmental values.

measure and the calculation of comprehensive

Two main types of amendments are needed

savings for sub-Saharan Africa.39 From a pover-

from an environmental perspective. First, the

ty reduction perspective, this type of macro-

national income accounting system needs to dif-

level analysis needs to be complemented with a

ferentiate between income derived from sustain-

distributional analysis—how do environmental

able use of resources and income derived from

degradation and investment in human capital

38

liquidation of natural capital. Second, water, soil,

46

an approximation of investment in human cap-

affect the poor?

and air pollution affect the level of environmen-

Environmental valuation also has a role to

tal quality and sometimes the productive capac-

play in assessing the costs and benefits of public

ity of the economy directly. In the latter case, the

reforms affecting the environment. This is par-

traditional income account already incorporates

ticularly so when the benefits of improved health

the negative impact of pollution. While no fur-

must be compared with financial expenditure.40

ther adjustment to income is necessary, it is still

Moving on from the perspective of society

of policy relevance to trace the magnitude of the

as a whole and down to the micro level of indi-

impacts. When pollution does not directly affect

vidual and household decisions, poor people—

current productivity, however, but instead non-

like everyone else—will be influenced consi-

marketed environmental services or future pro-

derably by market prices. If market prices for

ductivity by inflicting long-term health damage,

environmental goods and services are not avail-

an amendment in national income accounting is

able, they need to be derived, using techniques

needed.

of environmental economics. In summary, the in-

The policy signals emerging from national

centives for people to make rational choices need

accounting data can be quite different if adjust-

to be improved. This is borne out in an example

ments for subtractions or additions of human

from Cambodia, where it was shown that local

and natural capital are taken into consideration.

fisheries were damaged by the destruction of

One method is to derive an adjusted measure

mangroves to make room for shrimp farms. Fur-

called Comprehensive Savings. Starting with the

thermore, the shrimp farms polluted the water,

standard concept of net domestic savings, the

which further brought down catches for the tra-

current expenditures on education are added as

ditional fishers. The economic analysis showed

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

Key areas for policy action to improve poverty-environment outcomes F I G U R E

% GNI 30

Sub-Saharan Africa 20 Gross national saving 10

6

Net national saving plus education exp.

Net national saving

0 Comprehensive saving –10

–20 1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

Source: World Bank, 2002c.

that local communities in general would benefit

to implement sustainable practices, as a source

from conserving the mangroves (Bann, 1997).

of expertise and funding, and as a potentially

Results from environmental economic analysis

potent advocate for sound environmental man-

should be translated into policy and implement-

agement (particularly where private-sector inter-

ed if they are to have an impact on people’s ac-

ests may coincide with those of the poor). The

tions. This could be done, for example, through

impacts on poverty-environment issues are

imposing fees on the harmful activities (clearing

mixed, but are heavily dependent on the way the

of mangroves, establishment of shrimp farms).

private sector is managed and regulated.

This will not only discourage such activities, it

Governments need to maximize the efficien-

may also be a vehicle to compensate those who

cy gains from the private sector while safeguard-

suffer the consequences.

ing the interests of the poor. For example, while privatization can improve the economic efficien-

Encourage appropriate private-

cy of environmental services such as waste man-

sector involvement in pro-poor

agement, sanitation, and wastewater treatment,

environmental management

governments may need to provide safeguards to ensure that access by the poor is protected

With increasing liberalization in many countries,

and improved. At the same time, governments

the role of the private sector has expanded, mak-

need to increase their capacity for environmen-

ing it an important player in terms of its ability

tal regulation of private-sector operations and

47

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

enforcement of compliance. Particular attention

ships are an increasingly common approach to

should be given to ensuring that private-sector

expanding and seeking to improve environmen-

operators integrate environmental consider-

tal services such as potable water supply, sew-

ations into their operations. This can include

age services, efficient transport, and efficient

promotion of environmental management sys-

energy production.

tems, environmental auditing and reporting,

There has been an increase in private-sector

and adherence to internationally agreed codes

participation in the water services sector (water

of conduct.

supply, irrigation, and hydropower) in recent

A number of private companies in develop-

years (see Box 12). Still, private-sector water ser-

ing countries are now certified as meeting the

vices only account for about 5 percent of all ser-

international standard ISO 14000 for environmen-

vices worldwide (World Bank, 2002b). The impact

tal management. A review in 2000 found that

is the subject of a major controversy.41 However,

about 3,700 companies in the developing world

experience to date indicates that public authori-

had achieved this (ISO, 2001). China and Korea

ties will need to ensure that the service provid-

each had over 500 accredited companies; Brazil,

ers do not use their market power to exploit

Thailand, and Taiwan had more than 300 com-

customers and that they internalize public health

panies; India had over 250 companies; and

and environmental externalities. Public authori-

Argentina, Mexico, Hong Kong, Malaysia,

ties also need to ensure that water consumption

Singapore, and South Africa each had more than

is at a sustainable level, provide mechanisms to

100 accredited companies. While many of these

ensure that water supplies are efficiently allo-

companies are affiliates of foreign firms, some are

cated between alternative uses, and serve as a

locally owned industries.

guarantor of a level of service provision that

Full privatization of environmental services may not be desirable or possible, however. A pri-

is consistent with a basic standard of living (Johnstone, Wood, and Hearne, 1999).

vate company may not find it profitable to invest in potable water or sewage services for the

Implement pro-poor environmental

poor, and strong trade unions may oppose pri-

fiscal reform

vate-sector involvement if they fear heavy job

48

losses. A promising approach to bringing in

Environmentally harmful subsidies are a key area

private-sector investment is the establishment of

for policy reform. These are subsidies that are

public-private partnerships. In these, a govern-

both financially quite costly and lead to the over-

ment (national or local) enters into an agreement

use of natural resources and other unintended

with a private enterprise to deliver investment

side effects, such as increased pollution. It is im-

and services within a jointly agreed regulatory

portant to acknowledge that the largest such sub-

framework that safeguards the interests of the

sidies are handed out in industrial countries (as

population to be served. Public-private partner-

discussed in the next section).

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

BOX 12

Public-private partnerships for water services in South Africa

In 1994, South Africa’s first post-apartheid government produced a policy paper on Community Water Supply and Sanitation, in 1997 it passed the Water Services Act, and in 1998 it passed the National Water Act. South Africa’s legislation provides an enabling framework for local action through the decentralization of powers, rights, and responsibilities to the local level, as well as guidelines and regulations to help promote social equity and environmental sustainability.

This flexibility at the local level has led to innovation and experimentation with public-private partnerships to develop water systems for the poor. The government funds basic infrastructure services, while users must pay for higher levels of service such as household connections and maintenance through a fee-based system for water services. A substantial volume of work was also undertaken by water boards that are public-sector bulk suppliers of water acting as implementing agents for government. The boards, in turn, contracted with the private sector to provide project management and specialist services to projects. The construction was undertaken by private contractors using local labor who were contracted to the water users. The water users are organized as for-profit organizations.

A European Commission review in 1999 found that this approach had provided 5 million people with water, completed 205 water projects, and created 310,000 jobs. The most recent figures are 7 million people provided with clean water. While the scheme has not been without problems, it has demonstrated the potential for developing water systems through innovative collaborations between all spheres of government, the private sector, civil society organizations, and the users themselves.

Source: Personal communication from H. Muller, Acting Chief Director of Water Services, DWAF, South Africa, 2002; EU,1999.

Environmentally harmful subsidies also are

oping countries are on the order of US$13 bil-

common in developing countries, particularly

lion, and subsidies to electricity amount to more

in the agriculture and infrastructure sectors.

than US$100 billion (IMF, World Bank, and

While many subsidies have been reduced or

UNEP, 2002).

eliminated as part of structural adjustment and

Subsidies to electricity can also be environ-

other policy reform processes (see Box 13)—for

mentally beneficial, as they encourage replace-

example, the removal of pesticide subsidies in

ment of dirty fuels. These subsidies are often

Indonesia—the underpricing of natural resourc-

regressive, however, as the rich benefit much

es such as water for irrigation and various forms

more than the poor—for example, the poorest

of fossil energy continues in many countries.42

often are not served by subsidized electricity,

Cost-recovery for irrigation water is only 10–25

water, and waste collection. Even where the poor

percent in some of the major developing coun-

do get some benefit, subsidy reform can be struc-

tries. Subsidies to gasoline and diesel in devel-

tured to increase significantly its ‘pro-poor’ effect

49

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

BOX 13

Energy subsidy reform and the poor in China

The environment can also be a major source of revenue, and thereby contribute to financing poverty reduction measures. The potential for additional rent capture is substantial in the for-

China has made major strides in reforming its energy subsidies, particularly those to the coal industry, with significant benefits in terms of reduced pollution. Total economic subsidies for fossil fuels fell from US$25 billion in 1990/91 to US$10 billion in 1995/96. The remaining subsidies still benefit the wealthier households, however, as most of the subsidized coal goes to urban areas. In rural areas, households depend on biomass and coal for cooking bought on the free market. Even where subsidized coal is distributed in rural areas, such as Western Xiushui, it primarily benefits higher-income households. Rural energy is also consumed by town and village enterprises, but where prices have risen, as in Changsha County, this has encouraged non-energy-intensive production with higher value-added.

est sector of many countries, and has been estimated to amount to US$9 billion per year.43 Not all of this can reasonably be captured, due to illegal logging and poor data availability. However, moving toward better rent capture for forestry would dampen the rapid depletion of tropical forests and could be particularly important for small, forest-rich countries in terms of their fiscal revenue (IMF, World Bank, and UNEP, 2002).

Charging visitors fees in protected areas is another underutilized form of rent capture. Some US$1-3 billion per year could probably be raised in developing countries if fees were increased to levels of visitors’ actual willingness to pay. Some of these areas already charge, but many refrain from charging visitors, especially foreign visitors,

Source: World Bank, 1996a; World Bank, 1997.

fees that approach their appreciation for the environmental services provided by protected areas (IMF, World Bank, and UNEP, 2002).

50

and to be less environmentally damaging. For ex-

Rent taxes are more common for countries

ample, tariffs for water or electricity can be dif-

with rich fisheries that are exploited by other

ferentiated to ensure the poor a basic supply at a

countries’ fishing fleets—such as Japan, South

“lifeline” rate while raising the marginal cost for

Korea, Taiwan, and Spain. While most countries

large-volume consumers. There are other ways

in this position do charge for licenses or have joint

to target the poor directly to raise their standard

venture agreements, they are often not receiving

of living in general without subsidizing specific

the full amount. The size of fishery rent tax reve-

commodities that the rich also consume. The po-

nues from other countries’ fleets is significant for

tential impacts on the poor and the environment

certain countries—in particular, for small islands

of alternative approaches to subsidy reform

in the Pacific and some African countries. Be-

should be reviewed through environmental and

tween 1993 and 1999, Mauritania received 15 per-

social impact assessments and be subject to pub-

cent of its total budget revenue from European

lic comment before they are adopted.

Community fishing agreements, while in Sao

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

Tome the figure was 13 percent and in Guinea Bissau, 30 percent (IFREMER, 1999).

These ideas have been vigorously put into practice in many countries. For example, China

It is also important, where possible, to ad-

earned US$600 million in 1999 from emission

just market prices to include the nonmarketed

charges. Most of these funds went to finance pol-

environmental effects. Examples include “green

lution abatement measures (IMF, World Bank,

taxes,� effluent/emissions fees, deposit refund

and UNEP, 2002). In the longer run, high pollu-

schemes, and tradable permits. The poverty rel-

tion charges should result in a shift to less-

evance of these instruments lies primarily in

polluting industry practices and hence falling

their ability to signal the full social cost of pol-

revenues from emission charges. The main pur-

lution and environmental damage, thereby pro-

pose, however, is not to raise revenue, but to cor-

viding an incentive to limit damaging activities

rect for externalities.

that generally tend to affect the poor most

Using market-based instruments to ensure

(World Bank, 2000a). The impact on the poor

that environmental costs are incorporated in mar-

of market price adjustments should also be con-

ket prices is institutionally demanding. A gradual

sidered, however, particularly if they are signif-

and flexible approach is necessary. Environmen-

icant and sudden.

tal levies are often met with stiff opposition from

44

51

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

the polluters who must pay, but earmarking the

Because of the growing globalization of the

revenue from environmental fees can improve

world economy and the transboundary nature of

public acceptance of such levies. A review of the

many environmental problems, efforts to reduce

experience of 11 Latin American countries empha-

poverty and improve the environment cannot

sizes that revenues must be channeled to local

succeed on a sustainable basis through domestic

authorities so that they can build the institutional

action alone. There is a growing recognition of

capacity required for effective implementation

the need for greater coherence in international

(Huber, Ruitenbeek, and Seroa da Motta, 1998).

economic and environmental policymaking—in-

Price reform is important in correcting mar-

cluding the international policies of industrial

ket signals, but there will always remain some

countries—in order to support the poverty reduc-

environmental issues that require direct regula-

tion and sustainable development strategies of

tion of activities, including outright prohibition,

developing countries more effectively. In partic-

in order to protect the environment and the poor.

ular, this includes support for domestic policies

Examples include the banning of particularly

that enhance sustainable development and cre-

harmful pesticides and the regulation of allow-

ate an economic environment conducive to envi-

able applications of others. These measures cre-

ronmentally sustainable trade, investment, and

ate an incentive for private producers to find new

economic growth. And it requires international

and more environmentally friendly products that

economic and environmental frameworks that

can achieve the same objectives.

provide sustainable growth opportunities for developing countries, including market access for their exports.

2.4 Reforming international and industrial-country policies Key areas for policy action:

52

Reform international and industrialcountry trade policies

Reform international and industrial-

International trade can boost economic growth

country trade policies

and make a decisive contribution to poverty re-

Make foreign direct investment more pro-

duction and sustainable development by pro-

poor and pro-environment

moting the equitable integration of developing

Enhance the contribution of multilateral

countries and the poor into the global economy.45

environmental agreements to poverty

However, to maximize the benefits to develop-

reduction

ing countries of global economic and trade in-

Encourage sustainable consumption and

tegration (and to minimize potential social and

production

environmental costs), reforms are needed to

Enhance the effectiveness of development

make the current global trading regime more

cooperation and debt relief.

inclusive and balanced in terms of developing

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

country needs (Third World Network, 2001;

rity (MRAG, 2000). These agreements need to be

Rodrik, 2001). At the national level, a sound and

reviewed and reformed.

supportive domestic policy and regulatory

Furthermore, the trade-related standards of

framework is needed—including pro-poor eco-

most industrial countries can affect developing

nomic policies—in tandem with sound environ-

countries and smaller-scale producers. For in-

mental management.

stance, legislation on sanitary and phyto-sanitary

In agriculture, many developing countries

(SPS) measures can create challenges for devel-

are still unable to realize their comparative ad-

oping countries that often lack the scientific ex-

vantage because agricultural trade policies in

pertise and technical capacity to comply with

industrial countries depress world prices for

regulations set by importing industrial countries.

farm products. Protection in rich countries costs

In effect, SPS measures can create (at least in the

developing countries more than US$100 billion

short run) non-tariff barriers that potentially limit

per year (World Bank, 2002a). The OECD coun-

the ability of developing countries to gain access

tries subsidize their agriculture with almost

to foreign markets for their agricultural and fish-

US$1billion per day, much of it encouraging use

eries exports. Yet by increasing the assurance that

of agrochemicals and planting of lands that oth-

exports are produced in sustainable ways and

46

erwise would have been left fallow. These sub-

that SPS standards are met, such measures can

sidies also have the effect of creating barriers to

also add value and marketability to products.48

export of agricultural commodities from poor-

This is the case of organic shade-grown cof-

er countries, making poverty reduction more

fees, which continue to earn fairly high prices

difficult. Similarly, subsidies for marine fisher-

despite generally depressed global market pric-

ies have been estimated to total about US$25

es for lower-grade coffee. The application of cer-

billion per year, or about one-third of the value

tification standards for forest management

of the catch. This contributes significantly to the

practices is another promising area (Bass et al,

global pressure on this natural resource (Myers

2001). An example of successful adoption of cer-

and Kent, 2001).

tified sustainable forest management and mar-

The overall impact of industrial-country ag-

ket access is provided by Portico S. A. of Costa

ricultural trade liberalization on the environment

Rica. The company manufactures high-end ma-

and natural resources of developing countries is

hogany doors that command a premium price.

not clear, as the issues are complex and the pos-

Thanks to its certified management practices, the

47

sible effects are mixed. More conclusive impacts

product can be exported worldwide without con-

arise from international fisheries agreements (for

troversy at a time when tropical deforestation is

example, by many European and African states)

an increasing concern (Diener, 1998). These en-

that often have had adverse development and

vironmental standards need to be combined with

resource depletion impacts on local fishery com-

capacity development in developing countries,

munities who depend on fish for their food secu-

in particular among small and medium-sized

53

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

producers, to allow them to meet requirements

development assistance (IMF, World Bank, and

effectively and to turn them into a market advan-

UNEP, 2002).49 Even though these flows are fo-

tage rather than an obstacle (see Box 14).

cused on only a handful of countries, foreign investment is still a key part of resource inflows in

Make foreign direct investment

the remaining developing countries. Indeed, in

more pro-poor and pro-environment

order to promote poverty reduction, many countries are seeking to encourage foreign investment.

Foreign direct investment and foreign portfolio

This is particularly important to the poverty-

flows amounted to more than US$160 billion by

environment agenda in countries where foreign

the end of the last decade and now dwarf official

investment is concentrated in resource extraction, infrastructure, and manufacturing sectors.

The overall environmental impact of multinational enterprises in developing countries is

BOX 14

mixed—while there is no evidence of a “race to

Successful adjustment to environmental health standards

the bottom” in terms of environmental standards

In 1989, Germany—the leading export market for Indian leather products— banned the import of consumer goods containing PCPs and a large number of dyes, citing concerns over health impacts on consumers. These chemicals were routinely used in leather tanning in India.

It came as a shock to this important export industry, which ranked fourth in revenue at the time.

The export ban prompted a quick regulatory action by the Indian government to prohibit manufacturing of the banned chemicals; the application of standardized methods for testing, so as to ensure compliance; and rapid development of low-cost substitutes. Surprisingly, this example shows that even highly dispersed, traditional small-firm clusters can meet strict environmental standards successfully in a relatively short time and stay competitive.

(World Bank, 2002a), there is mixed evidence that foreign firms are cleaner than domestic ones once firm size is included (Zarsky, 1999).50 However, multinational firms operating in developing countries are increasingly trying to improve environmental performance, supported by a number of important initiatives. In 2000, OECD members agreed on a revised voluntary Code of Conduct for Multinational Enterprises, which has a significant environmental component (OECD, 2000). The UN has been promoting a Global Compact with the private sector that has nine principles, including on the environment. The Global Reporting Initiative, with the support of UNEP, is a multistakeholder international undertaking that is drawing up an international standard for reporting on the economic, social, and environmental dimensions of a firm’s activities, products, and services (GRI, 2000).

Source: Pillai, 2000.

Foreign direct investment is particularly linked to poverty-environment issues through the

54

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

oil, gas, and mining sectors (see Box 15). Many of the world’s poorest countries—Papua New Guinea, Chad, Mozambique—are the site of ma-

BOX 15

Mining companies and the environment in Latin America

jor investments, with the minerals often located in isolated regions. However, the contribution of an oil, gas, or mining corporation to a country’s wealth through tax and royalty revenues is frequently not matched by the influence that company has over revenue management. Companies with long-term investments have an incentive to improve relations with local residents. In some cases, this has led to investments in local schools, clinics, and infrastructure. Generally, the companies would prefer to see this as the role of national and local governments. The problem arises where governments do not make these investments, and the private companies are reluctant to apply pressure on the host government for fear that they will lose out—for example, by not being awarded future contracts.

Targeted partnerships between investors, the host-country national and regional governments, development agencies, and local communities can begin to address these problems (IIED and WBCSD, 2002). An example is the Lihir gold mine in Papua New Guinea, where participation by local residents as shareholders was financed by a private investment bank. Furthermore, a closer alignment of social investment practices among oil companies, municipal governments, and development agencies can provide the political incentive to redirect revenues back to the regions where minerals are extracted. Greater complementarity between community develop-

Detailed studies of the mining sector of Chile, Peru, Brazil, and Bolivia during a period of privatization found that environmental damage was not evenly distributed within the minerals sector of each country. Rather, it seemed to vary according to factors such as type of mineral, vintage of technology, stage of investment, stage of operation, level of integration, effectiveness of environmental regulation and its enforcement, and socioeconomic context (including poverty in local communities and workforce education and training). Most of all, environmental performance varied according to the firm’s capacity for technology development and innovation—which did explain the generally better performance of foreign firms over state-owned ones.

In the Chilean industry, several international mining firms adopted environmental practices in advance of legislated norms and institutional recommendations.

The state-owned companies face massive challenges in dealing with past difficulties in terms of accumulated environmental problems, combined with other factors such as the state companies’ history, culture, and resource constraints. In Brazil, however, while foreign firms did sometimes have environmentally proficient practices due to their greater technological capacity and financial resources, others have lagged in the implementation of practices already adopted in the companies’ more stringently regulated home countries.

Source: Warhurst, 1998.

ment activities of corporations and the regional development plans of municipal authorities can

55

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

improve the responsiveness of government to

nificance in a poverty-environment context. First,

community needs and increase the perceived le-

because of the rapid build-up of greenhouse gas-

gitimacy of public office (Warner, 2000).

es, the earth’s overall temperature will warm significantly, precipitation patterns will change,

Enhance the contribution of

and sea levels will rise, leading to food insecu-

multilateral environmental

rity, lack of access to potable water, and loss of

agreements to poverty reduction

livelihoods. Second, the adverse impacts of projected changes in climate conditions will pose

56

Globalization and global environmental change

major development challenges for most develop-

have focused international attention on the role

ing countries in the tropical and subtropical

of global public goods such as biodiversity, the

zones. It is therefore of major importance to en-

atmosphere, international waters, and global ag-

hance the capacity of developing countries to

ricultural research in achieving sustainable de-

adapt to future climate change.51

velopment. Two of the major environmental

The causes of biodiversity loss are more com-

global public goods—a stable climate and main-

plex than climate change. As the whole world

tenance of biodiversity—have many benefits for

benefits from maintaining biodiversity, and as

the poor.

developing countries lack resources, it is incum-

The main historic responsibility for climate

bent on the industrial world to bear a fair pro-

change lies with the industrialcountries, and

portion of the costs of global biodiversity

strong efforts should be made to reduce their

conservation, both through direct assistance and

greenhouse gase emissions. At the same time, the

through more careful assessment of the impact

developing world includes countries where emis-

of their trade, investment, and other interactions

sions of greenhouse gases and related pollutants

with the developing world.52 A major instrument

are unsustainable and where being locked into

for direct assistance is the Global Environment

high-emitting technologies is less and less likely

Facility. Negotiations are currently ongoing for

to be the least-cost option for development. So

the GEF’s next financing period, with a signifi-

there is a need to ensure that whenever technical-

cant increase required to help protect the world’s

ly feasible and cost-efficient, development assis-

climate and biodiversity and other global envi-

tance is used to implement solutions that advance

ronmental goods that benefit all, but often the

several development goals at once—such as pub-

poor most of all.

lic health, biodiversity conservation, and climate

Over the past 50 years, international environ-

change mitigation and adaptation—all of which

mental policies have been agreed in the context

should contribute to poverty eradication.

of numerous multilateral environmental agree-

Despite uncertainties about where, when,

ments (MEAs). Each agreement has been de-

and by how much changes in climate will occur,

signed to address a pressing environmental issue

there is little debate on some basic issues of sig-

and has its own structure and processes for im-

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

plementation. While some steps have been take

adequately. Effective participation in internation-

to improve coordination in the negotiation and

al negotiations, however, requires capacity and

implementation of MEAs, progress has been lim-

resources that the poorest countries often lack. It

ited and there is a need for better coordination

also requires political will for the interests of the

and harmonization to improve efficiency and to

poor to be made central to both the negotiation

ensure that MEAs are mutually supportive

and implementation of these MEAs. For exam-

(OECD, 2002). Equally important is the need to

ple, it is important to ensure that the Clean De-

integrate MEA principles and policies into glo-

velopment Mechanism promotes investments

bal economic policies and decisionmaking in or-

that benefit the poor and the environment (IIED,

der to avoid conflicts and to maximize potential

2000). Industrial countries should assist others

synergies—in particular, to ensure that trade and

in implementing the objectives of the MEAs to

environmental policies are mutually supportive.

which they are each party, and they should en-

Developing countries should be enabled to

sure that they do not unilaterally, or through

take on increased responsibilities under global

multilateral operations, support actions of devel-

agreements to which they are party, and to en-

oping countries that are not in compliance with

sure that these agreements reflect their concerns

MEAs to which they are party.

57

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Encourage sustainable consumption and production

BOX 16

Curbing industrial-country imports of illegal timber from Indonesia

Through their trade, investment, pollution emissions, and other activities, industrial-country consumers and producers affect the environmental conditions of developing countries. While this section focuses primarily on specific steps relevant to trade, investment, and global public goods, there is a broader underlying issue—the level of production and consumption in the industrial world.

Making rich-country consumption and production more sustainable will require a complex mix of institutional changes—addressing market and government failures as well as broad public attitudes. As in developing countries, it will also require working with many different stakeholders in government, civil society, and the private sector. And also as in developing countries, it is not just a technical process but a political one— certain groups will welcome change, while others will resist it. One interesting example of the new alliances being forged between stakeholders in industrial countries and their partners in developing ones is the recent Memorandum of Understanding between Indonesia and the UK on Indonesian forestry exports (see Box 16).

The rich countries of the world recently acknowledged their responsibility to reduce environmental pressure in the OECD report Sustainable Development, Critical Issues (OECD, 2001b): “OECD countries have a key role to play in addressing the pressures on the environment from human activities. With 18 percent of the world’s population, they account for over half of today’s

58

Indonesia is a major exporter of timber to Europe. Much of this timber is illegally or unsustainably harvested. In 2001, a conference in Asia on forest law enforcement and governance examined how developing-country producers and industrial-country consumers could work together to promote sustainable logging.

In 2002, this led to a Memorandum of Understanding between the Indonesian Minister of Forestry and UK Ministers for the Environment and International Development to cooperate on forest law enforcement and combat illegal logging and trade in illegal timber and wood products.

This agreement will help set up legal compliance for Indonesian forest exports, which will eventually allow all UK imports to be only from legal sources. This would require amending UK customs law, which may also require EU legislation. In the meantime, the UK Timber Trade Federation has already drawn up a voluntary code of practice to work with Indonesian suppliers to source their timber from legal logging.

The Group of Eight (G-8) partners, including the US, Germany, and Japan, are interested in such voluntary agreements, and the European Commission (EC) will be issuing a Communication to bring wider regional involvement of the European Union. An African conference on forest law enforcement and governance is now being planned between the heads of state of African timber-producing countries and the G-8, including the US, France, the UK, and the EC. Source: Internal DFID documents.

Policy Opportunities to Reduce Poverty and Improve the Environment

total energy consumption, over 60 percent of ce-

tion by ensuring more consistent market open-

reals consumption, 31 percent of consumption of

ing, increased public and private financing of

food fish, 44 percent of consumption of forest

development cooperation, as well as better func-

products and a large fraction of the cumulative

tioning and greater stability in the international

damage imposed on the environment globally.”

financial system” (EC, 2002).

The OECD report goes on to identify steps in the energy, transport, agriculture, and manu-

Enhance the effectiveness of

facturing sectors to reduce environmental dam-

development cooperation and

age—which will benefit both OECD members

debt relief

and developing countries. For each of these key sectors, the OECD report provides a detailed list

Achieving the Millennium Development Goal of

of institutional, regulatory, and economic policy

halving absolute poverty by 2015 will require at

reforms to reduce environmental damage in its

least a doubling of official development assis-

30 member-states. The OECD also carries out reg-

tance (Devarajan, Miller, and Swanson, 2002;

ular “peer reviews” of its member-states to as-

Zedillo et al., 2001). Yet this would only bring

sess environmental performance. These are

the total level of aid to less than half a percent of

ministerial-level reviews, and the final reports are

GNP in OECD countries, still far below the inter-

public documents that provide constructive sug-

nationally accepted goal of 0.7 percent of GNP.

gestions for improvement.

Eradicating poverty will demand a much more

The EC also has been explicit in its strategy

ambitious effort, and the financial flows must be

for the 15 members of the European Union:

received with efficiency and accountability to be

“Industrialized countries have important respon-

effective—international aid works in a support-

sibilities in promoting sustainability initiatives—

ive domestic policy environment.53

first and foremost by putting their own house in

Many developing countries are burdened by

order, and by supporting a move to sustainable

unsustainable levels of debt. This hampers eco-

production and consumption patterns; in addi-

nomic growth and undermines their ability to provide health, education, and other basic services for their people. When unsustainable debt leads to budgetary cuts, environmental administration and services often are a target, leading to a slackening of environmental management.

The Heavily Indebted Poor Country Initiative aims to tackle the problem of unsustainable debt, and to ensure that the benefits from debt relief are used to reduce poverty and to avoid entering into a renewed spiral of indebtedness. 54

59

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Debt-for-nature swaps are another potential

tunities for improving environmental manage-

means for addressing poverty reduction and

ment. While our agencies have committed them-

environmental management objectives.

selves to better environmental management as a

Aid and debt relief can be provided to help

tool for poverty reduction, this now has to be

governments make many of the policy changes

operationalized throughout our respective orga-

recommended in this paper. As in developing

nizations—both in headquarters and in country

countries, development cooperation agencies are

offices.56 Continued efforts are needed to strength-

seeking to improve their governance structures

en agency procedures for evaluating the environ-

and operational effectiveness by:

mental risks and performance of development aid. However, much more emphasis is needed on

Adopting a more explicit commitment to

helping to develop country capacity to formu-

poverty reduction as the overriding

late, implement, and monitor policies and pro-

objective of development cooperation

grams to reduce poverty through better

Strengthening developing-country owner-

environmental management.

ship of the development process through

Putting these commitments into practice re-

support of nationally owned processes and

quires major changes in the way development

improved aid coordination

agencies do business. To take this message for-

Ensuring greater transparency, and greater

ward will require improved agency staff train-

engagement with civil society, at both

ing and staff skills, and more emphasis on

policy and operational levels

learning approaches. New tools and procedures

Making development cooperation more

need to be implemented. The shift in aid toward

results-based and accountable by focusing

more upstream work and greater emphasis on

more strongly on development outcomes,

sector and budget support present new challeng-

in particular by strengthening capacity to

es. The traditional project-based environmental

help countries achieve the Millennium

impact assessment approach needs to focus more

Development Goals

on sectors and policies, and in particular on en-

Decentralizing operations and empowering

vironmental issues that affect the poor. There is

country-level staff to be more flexible and

a need to provide incentives to program manag-

responsive to country needs.

ers to mainstream poverty-environment issues.

Senior management needs to provide strong lead-

To help move the poverty-environment agen-

ership—not just in policy statements, but also in

da forward, development agencies must learn

the way resources and staff are allocated. Final-

from past mistakes and incorporate these lessons

ly, there is a need for effective and transparent

into the new context for development coopera-

monitoring of progress and results in helping

55

60

tion. The shift in development cooperation to

countries determine and implement their own

focus more explicitly on poverty reduction and

agenda for reducing poverty through better en-

greater country ownership provides new oppor-

vironmental management.

Conclusion

T

his paper set out to articulate ways to reduce poverty in a sustainable manner through better environmental management. We have mapped out the key relationships between environment and poverty. Specifically, we have pointed to

the enormous burden of disease that affects the poorest through polluted water and air. We have also illustrated how directly and heavily dependent the poor are on natural resources and ecosystem services, and how their degradation can undermine people’s livelihoods. Related to this point is the vulnerability to environmental disasters that the poor are exposed to, and their limited ability to cope with such shocks. We know this not only because of empirical evidence, but most compellingly through what the poor themselves say.

While many links between environment and poverty are reasonably clear, we have also held up relationships that are controversial.

Environment and growth, environment and population, and natural resource degradation and the poor are all themes that have been subject to much generalization and oversimplification. Effective solutions must be guided by a nuanced understanding of the specifics of these relationships, often determined by local institutions and policies.

While we share a sense of urgency in combating environmental degradation, we have not dwelled at length on descriptions of problems that are generally, albeit not universally, agreed. Instead, we have

61

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

emphasized links between poverty and environ-

“environmental management,� as the links be-

ment and, above all, what lessons we can learn

tween poverty and environment are complex and

for the future. Hence, this paper is one that looks

crosscutting. We have not attempted to be com-

ahead with some degree of hope and optimism

prehensive and provide detailed recommenda-

for the future: there are sometimes win-win op-

tions. The details are best left to inclusive national

portunities, and there are rational ways of deal-

processes for shaping poverty reduction and sus-

ing with tradeoffs. Environmental degradation is

tainable development strategies. Rather, we have

not inevitable, nor is it an unavoidable sacrifice

tried to be selective and strategic, focusing on the

on the altar of economic growth. On the contrary,

key items around which we hope to stimulate

better environmental management is key to pov-

debate and action.

erty reduction.

62

The World Summit on Sustainable Develop-

In that spirit, this paper has discussed a large

ment is an opportunity for us all to focus on what

set of measures at both the national and the in-

is most important and to forge agreements that

ternational level that can be taken to reduce pov-

can lead the way forward. There can be no more

erty and enhance environmental quality. This has

important goal than to reduce and ultimately

taken us outside the realm of narrowly conceived

exterminate poverty on our planet.

Notes 1. Quotes are from Participatory Poverty Assessments in each country, which attempt to find out the views of the poor on poverty issues.

See Brocklesby and Hinshelwood, 2001; Narayan et al., 2000.

2. The study measured the nature and extent of “environmental income”—livestock fodder, fuelwood, natural fertilizers, wild fruits, vegetables and insects, gold from panning, wood for carpentry, grasses for baskets, and so forth—all of which added up to about 100 items in total. Cavendish collected his data during two separate agricultural years and in four villages in Zimbabwe. Close to 200 households were interviewed in 29 villages.

3. Definitions of environmental health differ. The data presented here are based on an analysis of the following health risks that make the largest contributions to the burden of disease: poor water quantity and quality, inadequate sanitation and waste disposal, indoor air pollution, urban air pollution, malaria, and agro-industrial chemicals and waste (including occupational hazards). Some reviewers of the Consultation Draft argued that HIV/AIDS should also be considered in this context. There is no dispute about the importance of HIV/AIDS, which is the number one cause of death in sub-Saharan Africa and the fourth largest killer worldwide. An estimated 40 million people live with this disease, and about half that number already have died (World Bank,

63

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

2002c). However, in the classification used in our

crops. The most extreme case of irreversibility

main source (Lvovsky, 2001), this disease fell

is the loss of species.

outside the definition of environmental hazards.

6. Another example is that traditional cop-

4. In a study of 1,000 randomly selected

ing mechanisms used by pastoralists are gradual-

households in Accra, Ghana, Songsore and

ly being foreclosed by the establishment of

McGranahan (1993) analyze the links between

sedentary agriculture in their traditional grazing

local environment, wealth, and health. Wealth is

lands.

measured in terms of possession of certain con-

7. Global Witness, a non-profit organization

sumer durables and frequency of meat, poultry,

that works to highlight the links between natural

or fish consumption. The poorest and the least

resource exploitation and human rights abuses,

poorest quintiles are singled out for comparison.

provides a number of examples where natural

The poorest households show higher incidence

resources such as timber, diamonds and oil are

of diarrhea, especially among children: 22 per-

used to fund conflict. See www.oneworld.org/

cent of the children in the poorest quintile but

global witness.

only 9 percent in the least poor were subject to

8. The indicators for the index of environ-

diarrhea in the two weeks prior to the interview.

mental quality are: decline in average emissions

The poorest enjoy significantly fewer environ-

of carbon dioxide per capita, comparing the 1980s

mental services (safe water, sewerage). They lack

with the 1990s; decreases in the average emission

knowledge or means to prevent diseases efficient-

of organic water pollutants (kg/day/worker)

ly, are exposed to more health hazards, and are

between the 1980s and the 1990s; and the annual

subject to more crowding (i.e., more people share

average rate of deforestation measured for 1980–

pots, toilets, living quarters, etc).

2000. Each country is ranked according to each

5. For example, several interventions to di-

criterion. Each country’s points over all the com-

minish water-borne disease, limit indoor air pol-

ponents are averaged and the averages are used

lution, and improve sanitation cost about

to re-rank the countries. This rank is the index

US$20–120 per saved disability-adjusted-life-

measured on the y-axis in the figure. The higher

year (Bojö et al., 2001). The cost of saving a “sta-

the figure, the better the change in environmen-

tistical life” per year in Beijing through better

tal ranking of indices over this time period. See

sulfur dioxide abatement has been shown to be

World Bank (2000c) for further details.

in the order of US$300 (World Bank, 2000a).

Lvovsky (2001) provides data on the cost-effec-

64

9. See Chapter 2 in World Bank (2002c) for additional examples and discussion.

tiveness of a large number of measures to com-

10. The win-win approach is developed un-

bat air pollution. Natural resources degradation

der the UNDP/EC Poverty and Environment Ini-

can reach a stage where rehabilitation is econom-

tiative (UNDP and EC, 2000), and in the World

ically infeasible, such as for highly degraded

Development Report on Development and Environ-

cropland that has lost a viable rooting depth for

ment (World Bank, 1992).

Notes

11. Ekbom and Bojö (1999) review the liter-

14. The UN guidance defines a strategy for

ature in relation to nine hypotheses related to

sustainable development as “a coordinated, par-

links between poverty and environment. They

ticipatory and iterative process of thoughts and

show that often-conflicting empirical results

actions to achieve economic, environmental and

should temper the tendency to oversimplify

social objectives in a balanced and integrated

about these relationships. Nevertheless, they

manner. . . . . The particular label applied to a

conclude that the poor tend to be major victims

national sustainable development strategy is not

of environmental degradation, which opens up

important as long as the underlying principles

opportunities for win-win interventions. See

. . . are adhered to” (UNDESA, 2002). For exam-

also the Poverty and Environment Initiative

ple, established frameworks such as a National

(UNDP and EC, 2000).

Vision, National Agenda 21, or a nationally

12. Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers

owned poverty reduction strategy can all provide

(PRSPs) were endorsed in September 1999 by the

a good basis for strategic action toward sustain-

World Bank and the International Monetary Fund

able development.

(IMF) as a new framework for poverty reduction.

15. One of the International Development

PRSPs are designed to be country-driven, with

Goals adopted by the UN General Assembly is

broad participation of civil society; based on an

to implement national sustainable development

understanding of the links between public actions

strategies by 2005. The Organisation for Econom-

and poverty outcomes; and oriented to achieve

ic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has

outcome-related goals for poverty reduction. This

defined such a strategy as “a coordinated set of

is usually a two-stage process with an Interim

participatory and continuously improving pro-

PRSP followed by the more consultative and par-

cesses of analysis, debate, capacity strengthen-

ticipatory full PRSP. For the latest versions of In-

ing, planning and investment, which integrates

terim and full PRSPs, see the World Bank or IMF

the economic, social and environmental objec-

websites at www.worldbank.org and www.

tives of society, seeking trade offs where this is

imf.org. The Poverty Reduction Sourcebook (World

not possible” (OECD, 2001c, p. 9).

Bank, 2001d) provides further detail on the de-

16. Financial transfers from the Global Envi-

sign of PRSP. It also contains a chapter on Envi-

ronment Facility (GEF) can contribute significant-

ronment (Bojö et al, 2001). It is available at

ly to addressing four critical threats to the global

www.worldbank.org.

environment: loss of biodiversity, climate change,

13. Of the 40 PRSPs reviewed, only 8 were

degradation of international waters, and deple-

“full” PRSPs, while the rest were Interim PRSPs.

tion of the ozone layer. But what about financial

The latter were written more as roadmaps on the

sustainability? The creation of Trust Funds in

way to a more comprehensive PRSP. As more and

perpetuity has been one answer. These provide a

more PRSPs become full PRSPs, the integration

means for ensuring long-term sustainability, but

of environment is expected to improve.

they also tie up substantial amounts of capital

65

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

for the long term. Other options include short-

ronmental health, interpretation often will be

term financing of an investment phase to allow,

context-specific—for example, acute respiratory

for example, a protected area to begin to gener-

infections may be lower in parts of Africa than

ate its own financial revenues that can ensure

India, as more cooking is done outdoors in Afri-

sustainability. See GEF (1998) for an evaluation

ca. For some indicators, such as losses from

of experience with Conservation Trust Funds.

environment-related disasters, more quantitative

17. The Environmental Sustainability Index

data will be possible. For other measures, such

(ESI) is a measure of overall progress toward en-

as the percentage of poor fishers with access to

vironmental sustainability, developed for 142

adequate catches, more qualitative data may be

countries. The ESI scores are based on a set of 20

required. Indicators can be final (focusing on

core “indicators,” each of which combines two

impacts and outcomes) or intermediate (outputs

to eight variables for a total of 68 underlying vari-

or inputs). Final indicators are the most impor-

ables. The ESI permits cross-national compari-

tant, but often it is hard to isolate the effect of the

sons of environmental progress in a systematic

intermediate input on the final outcome. As with

and quantitative fashion. The ESI is the result of

all indicators, poverty-environment indicators

collaboration among the World Economic

must be specific, measurable, attainable (and, by

Forum’s Global Leaders for Tomorrow Environ-

implication, cost-effective), relevant, and time-

ment Task Force, The Yale Center for Environ-

bound.

mental Law and Policy, and the Columbia

19. For example, see Shyamsundar, 2002;

University Center for International Earth Science

Nunnan et al., 2001; Henninger and Hammond,

Information Network. See their website for more

2000.

information at http://www.ciesin.org/indicators/ESI/.

18. Poverty-environment indicators can take

66

20. For a discussion of spatially disaggregated data in an urban context, see Hardoy, Mitlin, and Satterthwaite, 2001.

a variety of forms. Some are more generic in na-

21. We have focused here on national-level

ture, such as deaths from acute respiratory infec-

monitoring and evaluation, but it is recognized

tion as a measure of environmental health. Others

that lower levels of monitoring may be quite valu-

are more site-specific, such as livelihood depen-

able in informing local decisionmakers and the

dence on different kinds of natural resources. In-

public at large.

terpretation is always site-specific. For example,

22. See UNDP and EC (1999b, 1999e, 1999f,

in some cases reduced dependence on natural

and 1999g) for discussion of property rights is-

resources will mean a reduction in poverty as the

sues in rural and urban environments.

poor move to off-farm employment. Alternative-

23. The importance of this issue is underlined

ly, this could indicate increased poverty as a re-

in the context of the Millennium Development

sult of a decline in the poor’s access to resources.

Goals. The fifth one contains Target 11: “By 2020

Even for more generic indicators such as envi-

to have achieved a significant improvement in

Notes

the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers”

many technical, financial, and social difficulties

and Indicator 31: “Proportion of people with ac-

these face in developing countries.

cess to secure tenure.”

31. Many VIP latrines stand unused due to

24. Jodha (1986) has documented this pro-

lack of awareness of their benefits or because of

cess in the case of privatization of common prop-

poor placement or construction. Similarly, pro-

erty resources in India.

vision of low-cost soap will not help if people do

25. See IIED (2000) for several examples.

not use it to wash their hands. Such simple so-

26. For example, in Mexico the government

cial and technological changes should not be be-

passed a new water law in 1992 that formalized

littled: some 2–3 million children die every year

property rights to water and established the prin-

of diarrheal diseases. Handwashing could per-

ciple of participation. In less than a decade more

haps cut that number in half. See Public-Private

than 90 percent of the 3 million hectares in irri-

Partnership in Handwashing, a coalition between

gation districts have been turned over to user

the World Bank, governments, donors, the pri-

associations, representing half a million farmers.

vate sector, and NGOs, at www.worldbank.org/

Cost recovery has risen from 30 percent to 80

watsan/topics/handwashing.html.

percent. Some associations are involved in

32. The World Health Organization advo-

groundwater management, and the example of

cates four approaches to combat malaria: prompt

Hermosillo shows that local empowerment can

access to treatment, especially for young children;

bring pumping and recharge into balance. Par-

prevention and control among pregnant women;

ticipation and establishment of trade in water

vector control; and prediction and containment

markets have made this possible. See World Wa-

of epidemics.

ter Council, 2000.

27. See examples from Indonesia in Read and Cortesi, 2001.

33. For more details on the approach to disaster management, see ISDR Secretariat, 2002, and Gilbert and Kreimer, 1999.

28. Global sales of certified coffees (organic,

34. For a multitude of examples, see the web-

fair trade, and shade brands) are estimated at

site maintained by the Massachusetts Institute of

about US$500 million annually and are growing

Technology in collaboration with the World Bank

rapidly (Giovannuci, 2001).

and the Global Cities Alliance: Upgrading Urban

29. In their analysis for China and India,

Communities: A Resource for the Practitioners, at

Boudri et al. (2002) show that the substantial

www.mit.edu/afs/athena/org/u/urbanupgrad-

switches to renewable energy sources are not only

ing/index.html, and the website of the UNDP

directly cost-effective, but can also reduce the cost

Public-Private Partnerships for the Urban Envi-

of sulfur dioxide emission control considerably.

ronment program at www.undp.org/pppue.

30. Venkata (1997) contains a number of arti-

35. See, for example, Reed, 1992; Munasing-

cles documenting in considerable detail both the

he et al., 1994; Munasinghe and Cruz, 1995; and

promise of renewable energy technology and the

Reed, 1996.

67

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

36. Iannariello et al. (2001) contains a basic

al., 2001). When benefits are difficult to assess,

framework for understanding the environmen-

cost-effectiveness analysis to achieve certain en-

tal consequences of macroeconomic reforms, and

vironmental goals can be very useful; see

proposes a process for carrying out environmen-

Lvovsky, 2001, for examples.

tal impact assessment for such reforms.

37. The discussion in this section is kept at

(2000); Loftus and McDonald (2001), and World

the domestic level. International considerations

Bank (2002b), for contrasting perspectives and

are dealt with later in the paper.

examples of more and less successful inter-

38. For example, there is a difference between

ventions.

sustainably harvesting the nation’s forests up to

42. World Bank (1997) details how subsidies

their rate of growth (“living off the interest”) and

of almost US$180 million in 1995 dollars were

depleting the forest stock (“depleting the capi-

phased out in Indonesia in the late 1980s. Milled

tal”). Similarly, the depletion of a mineral re-

rice production has continued to rise.

source represents the liquation of a nonrenewable

43. The concept of “rent” is used here to de-

asset, which in traditional income accounting is

note the difference between the market value and

registered only as an income, but not as a depre-

the full cost of resource extraction. The latter in-

ciation of savings. More precisely, the deprecia-

cludes the normal market-based cost of capital.

tion of savings is represented by the resource

The excess is known as rent or profit.

rent—that is, the difference between the world

44. World Bank (2000a) provides many ex-

market price of the commodity in question and

amples of how economic instruments have been

the extraction/harvesting cost (see World Bank,

used successfully in developing countries. It also

1997, for details). This gives social planners and

discusses how some countries, in particular In-

civil society less than a complete picture of the

donesia and the Philippines, have used public

development of their economy. The United Na-

disclosure effectively, and how Mexico has suc-

tions Statistical Division, the World Bank, and the

cessfully offered training to small and medium

U.S. National Academy of Sciences have all

enterprises in pollution abatement.

developed and recommended forms of more

45. The World Bank study on globalization,

accurate national economic accounting systems

growth, and poverty (World Bank, 2002) details

to include the environment (Nordhaus and

how more than 20 developing countries with

Kokklenberg, 2001).

some 3 billion people have doubled their ratio of

39. The graph is derived from World Bank staff calculations based on World Bank, 2002c.

68

41. See Nickson and Franceys (2001); ADB

trade to incomes of the past 20 years. They have also increased their growth rate to an average of

40. Increasingly, willingness-to-pay measures

5 percent in the 1990s, which substantially ex-

are derived in developing countries to assess the

ceeds the average for rich countries. However,

value of, for example, enhanced water supply,

some 2 billion people live in developing coun-

sanitation services, and waste collection (Bojö et

tries that have not successfully integrated them-

Notes

selves in the growing world economy, and whose

on-the-ground forestry operations is assessed

aggregate growth rate was negative in the 1990s.

against a predetermined set of standards. The FSC

The relationship between aggregate growth and

Principles and Criteria for Forest Management

inequality is varied across countries. In Latin

serve as the global foundation for the develop-

America, global integration has widened wage

ment of region-specific forest-management

inequalities, but in several populous countries,

standards. Independent certification bodies, ac-

such as China, India, and Vietnam, the data show

credited by the FSC in the application of these

that growth has been closely related to poverty

standards, conduct impartial, detailed assess-

reduction.

ments of forest operations at the request of land-

46. Statistics from the official OECD website

owners. If the forest operations are found to be

(www.OECD.org) on Total Support Estimate,

in conformance with FSC standards, a certificate

which is an indicator of all gross transfers from

is issued, enabling the landowner to bring prod-

taxpayers and consumers in support of agricul-

uct to market as “certified wood� and to use the

ture , show a preliminary figure for 2000 of about

FSC trademark logo. The total area certified to

US$327 billion, down from US$356 billion in 1999.

date is close to 28 million hectares at 390 sites in

47. For example, more-profitable agriculture

54 countries. However, about two-thirds of those

could lead to the intensification (including wid-

sites are in Europe. See the FSC website for

er use of pesticides) and expansion of cropland,

additional information, at www.fscoax.org/

including into forest areas. At the same time, in-

principal.htm. Extending this type of initiative

creased agricultural exports may stimulate envi-

to developing countries will be important to se-

ronmentally beneficial practices, such as greater

cure access for their products, and can contrib-

fertilizer use that results in better ground cover

ute to improving natural resource management

and less soil erosion.

practices (Bass et al, 2001).

48. An important example of adjustment to

49. About 75 percent of foreign direct invest-

environmental standards comes from forestry.

ment accrues to only 10 middle-income countries,

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an in-

and the investments are heavily concentrated in

ternational nonprofit organization founded in

a few sectors: automotive, chemicals, electronic,

1993 to support environmentally appropriate,

energy, petroleum and petrochemicals, and phar-

socially beneficial, and economically viable man-

maceuticals. Just a fraction goes to the poorest

agement of the world’s forests. Members come

countries, with the 48 poorest receiving only

from environmental and social groups, the tim-

US$3 billion, and Africa receiving about 1 per-

ber trade and forestry profession, indigenous

cent of capital flows (IMF, World Bank, and

peoples organizations, community forestry

UNEP, 2002).

groups, and forest product certification organi-

50. Some developing countries have built up

zations from around the world. Forest certifica-

a more pollution-intensive industry, largely in re-

tion is the process by which the performance of

sponse to domestic demand. While developing

69

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

70

countries do struggle with pollution, foreign-

55. A 2000 review of Department for Interna-

owned plants tend to be less polluting than do-

tional Development in the United Kingdom

mestically owned ones in the same industry.

found that “environment as a potential develop-

Furthermore, empirical studies have not found a

ment opportunity—rather than as a risk to be

pattern of developing countries lowering envi-

minimized and mitigated—has not been fully

ronmental standards to attract investment. This

mainstreamed across the bilateral programme”

is not to write off the problems: environmental

(Flint et al., 2000). Similarly, a 1997 review of the

regulation is too weak to protect the poor from

environmental performance of European Com-

industrial pollution, but the cause is not foreign

munity programs in developing countries found

direct investment or globalization, but lack of

that “there is no institutional accountability for

domestic capacity.

ensuring that environmental actions are fully in-

51. This is the focus of a forthcoming Joint

tegrated into country programming or that the

Agency Paper on “Climate Change and Poverty:

support for environmental projects is based upon

Supporting Poor Countries and Poor People to

a broad strategy across regions” (ERM, 1997). A

Cope with Climate Change,” expected to be re-

review by the Operations Evaluation Department

leased in October 2002.

of the World Bank’s environmental policies and

52. Our concern here is primarily with the

activities, the first since 1987, found that “Bank

decline in populations of both flora and fauna

performance has substantially improved . . . but

important to the poor for a balanced diet and as

it has not yet integrated environmental concerns

sources of fiber and medication.

fully into its core objective or its country assis-

53. World Bank (1998) provide the empirical

tance and sector strategies” (Liebenthal, 2002). A

underpinnings for our general statements in an

2000 review of the global program on environ-

influential study on the effectiveness of aid.

ment of the United Nations Development Pro-

54. The Heavily Indebted Poor Country Ini-

gramme (UNDP) reached similar conclusions,

tiative was launched by the World Bank and IMF

and recent audits of UNDP have stressed the need

in 1996. A major extension was agreed in 1999 to

for strengthened mechanisms to mainstream en-

expand debt relief to about US$50 billion, aim-

vironmental considerations at both the policy and

ing at reducing the debt of more than 30 coun-

the operational levels. Other development agen-

tries. Freed-up resources will be used to support

cies face similar concerns.

poverty reduction measures, with an emphasis

56. This is reflected in the environment strat-

on education and health. To date, 24 countries

egies and policies of each of the four agencies—

have entered the Initiative. More information is

see DFID (2000a); EC (2001); UNDP (2001); and

available at www.worldbank.org/hipc.

World Bank (2001c).

References ACTS (African Centre for Technology Studies). 2000. Ecological Sources of Conflict in Southern Africa. Discussion Note. Nairobi.

ADB (Asian Development Bank). 2000. Privatization of Water Supplies in Ten Asian Cities. Manila.

Bann, C. 1997. An Economic Analysis of Alternative Mangrove Management Strategies in Koh Kong Province, Cambodia. Economy and Environment Program for South East Asia, Singapore.

Bartley, D. M. 1999. “Species Introduction, International Conventions, and Biodiversity: Impacts, Prospects and Challenges.” In R.P. Subasinghe, J.R. Arthur, M.J. Philips, and M.B. Reantaso, eds., Thematic Review on Management Strategies for Major Diseases in Aquaculture.

Report of a workshop in Cebu, Philipppines (28-30 November 1999).

Bass, S., M. Thornber, S. Roberts and M. Grieg-gran. 2001. Certification’s Impacts on Forests, Stakeholders and Supply Chains. International Institute for Environment and Development, London.

BDP (Biodiversity in Development Project). 2001. Biodiversity in Development: Guiding Principles. IUCN—The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Bojö, J., J. Bucknall, K. Hamilton, N. Kishor, C. Kraus, and P. Pillai. 2001.

“Environment.” In Poverty Reduction Strategy Sourcebook. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

71

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Bojö, J. and S. Pagiola. 2000. Natural Resources

Buckles, D. 1999. Cultivating Peace: Conflict and

Management. A contribution to the World

Collaboration in Natural Resource Management.

Bank Environment Strategy. World Bank,

International Development Research Centre,

Washington, D.C.

Ottawa.

Bojö, J., and R. C. Reddy. 2002. Poverty Reduction

Campbell, H. 1997. “Indoor Air Pollution and

Strategies: A Review of 40 Interim and Full

Acute Lower Respiratory Infections in Young

PRSPs. Environment Department Paper.

Gambian Children.” Health Bulletin 55:20–31.

World Bank, Washington, D.C. Boudri, J., L. Hordijk, C. Kroeze, M. Amann, J.

Poverty-Environment Relationship of African

Cofala, I. Bertok, Li Junfeng, Dai Lin, Zhen

Rural Households. Centre for the Study of Af-

Shuang, Hu Runquing, T.S. Panwar, S. Gup-

rican Economies. Working Paper Series 99–

ta, D. Singh, A. Kumar, M.C. Vipradas, P. Da-

21. London.

dhich, N.S. Prasad, L. Srivastava. 2002. “The

CGIAR (Consultative Group on International

Potential Contribution of Renewable Ener-

Agricultural Research). 2000. CGIAR Annu-

gy in Air Pollution Abatement in China and

al Report 2000, The Challenge of Climate Change:

India.” Energy Policy 30:409–24. Elsevier.

Poor Farmers at Risk. Washington, D.C.

Boyd, C., and T. Slaymaker. 2000. Re-examining

Dasgupta, J. and A. Das. 1998. Health Effects of

the “More People, Less Erosion” Hypothesis:

Women’s Excessive Work Burden in Deforested

Special Case or Wider Trend. ODI Natural Re-

Rural Areas of Uttarkhand. Paper presented at

source Perspectives No. 63. Overseas Devel-

the National Conference on Health and En-

opment Institute, London.

vironment. Centre for Science and Environ-

Brocklesby, M. A., and E. Hinshelwood. 2001.

ment, New Delhi.

Poverty and the Environment: What the Poor Say.

Devarajan, S., M. J. Miller, and E. Swanson. 2002.

Centre for Development Studies, University

Goals for Development: History, Prospects, and

of Wales.

Costs. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Bruce N., L. Neufeld, E. Boy, and C. West. 1998.

DFID (Department for International Develop-

“Indoor Biofuel Air Pollution and Respira-

ment). 2000a. Achieving Sustainability: Pover-

tory Health: The Role of Confounding

ty Elimination and the Environment. Strategies

Factors among Women in Highland Guate-

for Achieving the International Development

mala.” International Journal of Epidemiology

Targets. London.

27:454–58.

Brunner, J., F. Seymour, N. Badenoch, and B. Ratner. 2000. Forest Problems and Law Enforce-

72

Cavendish, W. 1999. Empirical Regularities in the

———. 2000b. Integrating Sustainability into PRSPs: The Case of Uganda. Environmental Policy Department. London.

ment in Southeast Asia: The Role of Local Com-

———. 2000c. Strategies for Sustainable Develop-

munities. World Resources Institute, Wash-

ment: Can Country-level Strategic Planning

ington, D.C.

Frameworks Converge to Achieve Sustainabili-

References

ty and Eliminate Poverty? DFID Background

mance of EC Programmes in Developing Coun-

Briefing. London.

tries. Brussels.

———. 2001. Making Government Work for Poor

ESD (Energy for Sustainable Development). 2000.

People. Strategies for Achieving the International

Poverty Reduction Aspects of Successful Im-

Development Targets. London.

proved Household Stoves Programme. DFID

———. 2002a. Draft Land Policy Paper. London.

Knowledge and Research Paper. London.

———. 2002b. Review of the Inclusion of Poverty-

EU (European Union Delegation). 1999. Evaluation

Environment Issues in Selected Poverty Reduc-

of the EU Contribution for Financial Year 1998/

tion Strategy Papers and Joint Staff Assessments.

1999 to the Sector Support Programme for Com-

Environmental Policy Department. London.

munity Water Supply and Sanitation, Pretoria,

Diener, B. J. 1998. “Portico S.A. Strategic Deci-

South Africa. European Union Delegation.

sions 1982–1997.” In The Business of Sustain-

Ezzati, M., and D. M. Kammen. 2001. “Indoor Air

able Forestry: Case Studies. A Project of the

Pollution from Biomass Combustion and

Sustainable Forestry Working Group. The

Acute Respiratory Infections in Kenya: An

John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foun-

Exposure-Response Study.” The Lancet

dation. Chicago, Illinois.

358:619-624.

EC (European Commission). 2001. Commission

Flint, M., P. Balogun, A. Gordon, R. Hoare,

Staff Working document SEC(2001) 609 of 10

D. Smith, B. Voysey, and A. Ziegler. 2000.

April 2001 on Integrating the environment into

Environmental Evaluation Synthesis Study. En-

EC economic and development co-operation, and

vironment: Mainstreamed or Sidelined? Main Re-

the respective Council Conclusions of 31 May

port, Volume 1, Evaluation Report EV626.

2001.

Department for International Development,

———. 2002. Towards a Global Partnership for Sus-

London.

tainable Development. Communication from

Folke, C., et al. 2002. Resilience and Sustainable

the Commission to the European Parlia-

Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a

ment, the Council, the Economic and Social

World of Transformations. Scientific Back-

Committee and the Committee of the Re-

ground Paper for the World Summit on Sus-

gions, 13 February 2002, COM(2002) 82 (fi-

tainable Development, prepared on behalf of

nal), Brussels.

the Environmental Advisory Council to the

Ekbom, A., and J. Bojö. 1999. Poverty and Environment: Evidence of Links and Integration into

Swedish Government (available at www. resalliance.org).

the Country Assistance Strategy Process. Envi-

Fukuda-Parr, S., C. Lopes, and K. Malik, eds.

ronment Group, Africa Region, World Bank.

2002. Capacity for Development: New Solutions

Washington, D.C.

to Old Problems. United Nations Develop-

ERM (Environmental Resources Management).

1997. Evaluation of the Environmental Perfor-

ment Programme and Earthscan, New York and London.

73

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

GEF (Global Environment Facility). 1998. GEF

Hardoy J., D. Mitlin, and D. Satterthwaite. 2001.

Evaluation of Experience with Conservation Trust

Environmental Problems in an Urbanising World:

Funds. GEF/C.12/Inf.6. Washington, D.C.

Finding Solutions for Cities in Africa, Asia and

Ghimire, K. B., and M. P. Pimbert. 1997. Social

Latin America. Earthscan Publications, London.

Change and Conservation. Earthscan Publica-

Henninger, N., and A. Hammond. 2000. A Strate-

tions, London.

Gilbert, R. and A. Kreimer. 1999. Learning from the World Bank’s Experience of Natural Disas-

tors Relevant to Poverty Reduction. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

ter Related Assistance. Disaster Management

Hodess, R., ed. 2001. Global Corruption Report

Facility, Urban and Local Government,

2001. Transparency International, Berlin.

World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Huber, R. M., J. Ruitenbeek, and R. Seroa da

Giovannuci, D. 2001. Sustainable Coffee Survey of

Motta. 1998. Market Based Instruments for En-

the North American Specialty Coffee Industry.

vironmental Policymaking in Latin America and

Conducted for The Summit Foundation, The

the Caribbean: Lessons from Eleven Countries.

Nature Conservancy, North American Com-

World Bank Discussion Paper No. 381. Wash-

mission for Environment Cooperation, Spe-

ington, D.C.

cialty Coffee Association of America, and the

Iannariello, M. P., P. Stedman-Edwards, R. Blair,

World Bank (available at www.scaa.org).

and D. Reed. 2001. Environmental Impact As-

Girot, P. 2000. Lessons from Hurricane Mitch: Nat-

sessment for Macroeconomic Reform Programs.

ural Hazards, Vulnerability and Risk Abatement

Macroeconomics Program Office, World

in Central America. IUCN World Conserva-

Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C.

tion Congress, Amman, Jordan.

Göeteborg University, 2002. Environment, development and conflict. EDC News (available at www.padrigu.gu.se/EDCNews/).

Goldman, L., and N. Tran. 2002. Toxics and Poverty. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross).

1999. Annual Report. Geneva.

———. 2001. World Disasters Report 2000. Focus on Recovery. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva.

IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Devel-

GRI (Global Reporting Initiative). 2000. Sustain-

opment). 2001. Rural Poverty Report 2001. Rome.

ability Reporting Guidelines on Economic, Envi-

IFREMER (Institut Francais de Recherche pour

ronmental, and Social Performance. Boston, MA.

l’Exploitation de la Mer). 1999. Evaluation of

GRID/Arendal. 1997. Mapping Indicators of Pov-

Fisheries Agreements Concluded by the Europe-

erty in West Africa. DEIA/TR.97-8. Technical

74

gy for the World Bank: Environmental Indica-

an Community. Summary Report.

Advisory Committee Working Document,

IIASA (International Institute for Applied Sys-

Consultative Group on International Agri-

tems Analysis). 2001. Global Agro-ecological

cultural Research, and Food and Agriculture

Assessment for Agriculture in the 21st Century.

Organization, Rome.

Vienna.

References

IIED (International Institute for Environment and

Background Document for the World Sum-

Development). 2000. Evaluating Eden: Explor-

mit on Sustainable Development (revised

ing the myths and realities of community-based

version 14 April 2002). Bonn.

wildlife management. Evaluating Eden Series No. 8. London.

ISO (International Standards Organization). 2001.

The ISO Survey of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000

———. 2000. Rural Livelihoods and Carbon Man-

Certificates, Tenth Cycle (available at http://

agement. IIED Natural Resource Issues Paper.

www.iso.ch/iso/en/iso9000-14000/pdf/

London.

survey10thcycle.pdf).

———. 2002. Drawers of Water II. In collabora-

Jodha, N. S. 1986. “Common Property Resources

tion with Community Management and

and Rural Poor in Dry Regions of India.”

Training Services Ltd. (Kenya), Institute of

Economic and Political Weekly 21(27):1169–81.

Resource Assessment of the University of

Johnstone, N., L. Wood, and R. Hearne. 1999. The

Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), and Department

Regulation of Private Sector Participation in

of Pediatrics and Child Health of Makerere

Urban Water Supply and Sanitation: Realising

University Medical School (Uganda).

Social and Environmental Objectives in Devel-

London.

oping Countries. Discussion Paper 99-01,

IIED and WBCSD (World Business Council for

Environmental Economics Programme, In-

Sustainable Development). 2002. Mining,

ternational Institute for Environment and

Minerals and Sustainable Development (Draft

Development, London.

Report). London.

Koziell, I. 2001. Diversity not Adversity: Sustaining

IMF (International Monetary Fund), World Bank,

Livelihoods with Biodiversity. International In-

and UNEP (United Nations Environment

stitute for Environment and Development

Programme). 2002. Financing for Sustainable

and Department for International Develop-

Development: An Input to the World Summit on

ment, London.

Sustainable Development. Revised Consultation Draft.

Koziell, I., and J. Saunders. 2001. Living Off Biodiversity: Exploring Livelihoods and Biodiversity.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Issues in Natural Resources Management.

Change). 2001. Summary for Policymakers. Cli-

International Institute for Environment and

mate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, and

Development, London

Vulnerability. A Report of Working Group II of the IPCC. Geneva.

Leighton, M. 1999. “Environmental Degradation and Migration.” In Drylands, Poverty and De-

ISDR Secretariat (International Strategy for Di-

velopment. Proceedings of the World Bank

saster Reduction). 2002. Disaster Risk and

Round Table. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Sustainable Development: Understanding the

Lele, S. 2001. Godsend, Slight of Hand or Just Mud-

Links Between Development, Environment and

dling Through: Joint Water and Forest Man-

Natural Hazards Leading to Disasters. Draft

agement in India. ODI Natural Resource

75

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Perspectives. Overseas Development Institute, London.

Lewis, Connie. 1996. Managing Conflicts in Protected Areas. IUCN-The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland.

Market: Can Private Enterprise Supply Water to the Poor? (available at www.id21.org/insights/ insights37/insights-iss37-editorial.html).

Nordhaus, W. and E. Kokklenberg, eds. 2001.

Loftus, A. J., and D. McDonald. 2001. “Of Liquid

Nature’s Numbers: Expanding the National Eco-

Dreams: A Political Ecology of Water Priva-

nomic Accounts to Include the Environment.

tization in Buenos Aires.” Environment & Ur-

National Research Council, National Acad-

banization, 13(2): 179-199.

emy Press, Washington, D.C.

Lvovsky, K. 2001. Health and Environment. Envi-

Nunan, F., with U. Grant, G. Bahiigwa, T. Mu-

ronment Strategy Papers, No. 1. Environment

ramira, P. Bajracharya, D. Pritchard, and M.

Department, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Jose Vargas. 2002. Poverty and the Environ-

MRAG (Marine Resources Advisory Group).

ment: Measuring the Links. A Study of Poverty-

2000. The Impact of Fisheries Subsidies on De-

Environment Indicators with Case Studies from

veloping Countries. Prepared in association

Nepal, Nicaragua and Uganda. Environment

with Cambridge Resource Economics and

Policy Department, Issue Paper No. 2. De-

International Institute for Environment and

partment for International Development,

Development. London.

London.

Munasinghe, M., and W. Cruz. 1995. Economy-

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation

wide Policies and the Environment: Lessons from

and Development). 2000. The OECD Guide-

Experience. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

lines for Multinational Enterprises, Revision

Munasinghe, M., J. Warford, A. Schwab, W. Cruz,

2000. Paris.

and S. Hansen. 1994. The Evolution of Envi-

———. 2001a. Poverty-Environment Linkages.

ronmental Concerns in Adjustment Lending: A

Working Party on Development Cooperation

Review. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

and the Environment (February 14). Paris.

Murray, C., and A. Lopez. 1996. The Global Burden of Disease. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Myers, N., and J. Kent. 2001. Perverse Subsidies: How Tax Dollars Can Undercut the Environment and the Economy. Island Press, Washington, D.C. Narayan, D., with R. Patel, K. Schafft, A. Radema-

76

Nickson, A., and R. Franceys. 2001. Tapping the

———. 2001b. Sustainable Development, Critical Issues. Paris.

———. 2001c. The DAC Guidelines. Strategies for Sustainable Development: Guidance for Development Cooperation. Paris.

———. 2002. DAC Guidelines on Integrating the ‘Rio Conventions’ in Development Cooperation.

DCD/DAC(2002)19. Paris.

cher, and S. Koch-Schulte. 2000. Voices of the

Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evo-

Poor: Can Anyone Hear Us? World Bank,

lution of Institutions for Collective Actions.

Washington, D.C.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

References

Ostrom, E., J. Burger, C. Field, R. Norgaard, and

Rodrik, D. 2001. The Global Governance of Trade

D. Policansky. 1999. “Revisiting the Com-

As If Development Really Mattered. Back-

mons: Local Lessons, Global Challenges.”

ground Paper prepared for the Project on

Science 284(5412):278-82.

Trade and Sustainable Human Development.

Osuntogun, A. 2002. Applied Poverty-Environment Indicators: The Case of Nigeria. Report submitted to the Environment Department, World Bank. Abuja.

Oxfam. 2002. Poverty in the Midst of Wealth: The Democratic Republic of Congo. Oxfam Policy Papers, Oxfam Briefing Paper. Oxford.

Payne, G. 2002. Land, Rights and Innovation: Improving Tenure Security for the Urban Poor.

ITDG Publishing, London.

Pillai, P. 2000. The State and Collective Action: Successful Adjustment by the Tamil Nadu Leather

United Nations Development Programme, New York.

Shepherd, G. 1991. “The Communal Management of Forests in the Semi-arid and Sub-humid Regions of Africa.” Development Policy Review 9:151–76.

Shively, G. 2001. “Poverty, Consumption Risk and Soil Conservation.” Journal of Development Economics 65:267–90.

Shyamsundar, P. 2002. Poverty-Environment Indicators. Environment Department Paper No. 84. World Bank, Washington, D.C.

Cluster to German Environmental Standards.

Smith, K. R. 1999. Pollution Management in Focus.

Unpublished MCP Thesis, Massachusetts

Indoor Air Pollution Discussion Paper No.

Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.

4, Environment Department, World Bank.

Quisumbing, A. R., E. Payongayong, J. B. Aidoo,

Washington, DC.

and K. Otsuka. 2001. “Women’s Land Rights

Smith, K. R. 2000. “National Burden of Disease

in the Transition to Individualized Owner-

in India from Indoor Air Pollution.” In Pro-

ship: Implications for Tree-Resource Manage-

ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of

ment in Western Ghana.” Economic Development

the United States of America, PNAS 2000

and Cultural Change 50(1):157-181.

97:13286–93.

Read, T., and L. Cortesi. 2001. Stories at the Forest

Songsore, J., and G. McGranahan. 1993. “Envi-

Edge: The KEMALA Approach to Crafting Good

ronment, Wealth and Health: Towards an

Governance and Sustainable Futures. Biodiver-

Analysis of Intra-urban Differentials within

sity Support Program, Washington, D.C.

the Greater Accra Metropolitan Area, Gha-

Reed, D., ed. 1992. Structural Adjustment and the

na.” Environment and Urbanization 5(2):10–34.

Environment. Earthscan Publications, London.

Third World Network. 2001. The Multilateral Trad-

Reed, D., ed. 1996. Structural Adjustment, the En-

ing System: A Development Perspective. Back-

vironment and Sustainable Development. Earth-

ground Paper prepared for the Project on

scan Publications, London.

Trade and Sustainable Human Development.

Reij, C., and A. Waters-Bayer, eds. 2001. Farmer Innovation in Africa. Earthscan Publications, London.

United Nations Development Programme, New York.

77

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Tiffen, M., M. Mortimore, and F. Gichuki. 1994.

———. 1999c. Economic Reforms, Globalization,

More People, Less Erosion: Environmental Re-

Poverty and the Environment. Poverty and En-

covery in Kenya. Chichester, New York.

vironment Initiative Background Paper 5 pre-

UN (United Nations). 2001. Report of the Panel of

pared by D. Reed and H. Rosa. UNDP, New

Experts on the Illegal Exploitation of Natural Resources and Other Forms of Wealth of the

———. 1999d. Energy as it Relates to Poverty Alle-

Democratic Republic of the Congo – S/2001/357

viation and Environmental Protection. Poverty

(available at www.reliefweb.int/).

and Environment Initiative Background Pa-

UNCHS (United Nations Centre for Human Settlements). 1996. An Urbanizing World: Global Report on Human Settlements. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

UNDESA (United Nations Department for Economic and Social Affairs). 2002. Guidance in

per 4 prepared by E. Morris and S.C. Rajan.

UNDP, New York.

———. 1999e. Forests and the Poverty-Environment Nexus. Poverty and Environment Initiative Background Paper 6 prepared by J.E.M. Arnold and P. Bird. UNDP, New York.

Preparing a National Sustainable Development

———. 1999f. Links Between Poverty and the Envi-

Strategy: Managing Sustainable Development in

ronment in Urban Areas of Africa, Asia and Latin

a New Millennium. WSSD Second Preparato-

America. Poverty and Environment Initiative

ry Session, Background Paper No. 13 (DESA/

Background Paper 1 prepared by D. Satter-

DSD/PC2/BP13). New York.

thwaite. UNDP, New York.

UNDP (United Nations Development Pro-

———. 1999g. Poverty-Environment Interactions in

gramme). 1997. Human Development Report

Agriculture: Key Factors and Policy Implications.

1997. Oxford University Press, Oxford and

Poverty and Environment Initiative Back-

New York.

ground Paper 3 prepared by S. Scherr. UNDP,

———. 2001. UNDP Thematic Trust Fund: Environment. New York.

New York.

———. 2000. Attacking Poverty While Protecting

UNDP and EC (European Commission). 1999a.

the Environment: Towards Win-win Policy Op-

A Better Life…With Nature’s Help: Success Sto-

tions. Poverty and Environment Initiative

ries. Poverty and Environment Initiative.

Synthesis Paper prepared by J. Ambler.

UNDP, New York.

UNDP, New York.

———. 1999b. Community and Household Water

UNDP, UNDESA (United Nations Department

Management: The Key to Environmental Regen-

for Economic and Social Affairs), and World

eration and Poverty Alleviation. Poverty and

Energy Council. 2000. World Energy Assess-

Environment Initiative Background Paper 2

ment. UNDP, New York.

prepared by A. Agarwal and S. Narain.

UNDP, New York.

78

York.

UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 1999. Trade Liberalization and the

References

Environment: Lessons Learned from Bangladesh,

———. 1996b. Pakistan: Economic Policies, Institu-

Chile, India, Philippines, Romania and Uganda.

tions, and the Environment. Report No. 15781–

Environment and Trade Unit, Geneva.

PAK, Agriculture and Natural Resources

———. 2002a. Fisheries Subsidies and Marine Re-

Division, Country Department I, South Asia

source Management: Lessons Learned from Stud-

Region, Washington, D.C.

ies in Argentina and Senegal. UNEP/ETU/

———. 1997. Five Years after Rio: Innovations in

2001/7 (Vol. II). Environment and Trade Unit,

Environmental Policy. Environmentally Sus-

Geneva.

tainable Development Studies and Mono-

———. 2002b. Global Environment Outlook 3: Past, Present and Future Perspectives. Earthscan Publications, London.

Venkata Ramana, P., ed. 1997. Rural and Renewable Energy: Perspectives from Developing Countries. Tata Energy Research Institute, New Delhi.

Wang, L. 2002. Health Outcomes in Poor Countries

graphs Series No. 18. Washington, D.C. ———. 1998. Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn’t, and Why. A World Bank Policy Research Report. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

———. 2000a. Greening Industry: New Roles for Communities, Markets, and Governments.

Washington, D.C.

and Policy Options: Empirical Findings from

———. 2000b. Indonesia Integrated Pest Manage-

Demographic and Health Surveys. Environment

ment Training Project. Implementation Comple-

Department, Policy Research Working Paper

tion Report. Washington, D.C.

2831. World Bank, Washington, D.C. Warhurst, A., ed. 1998. Mining and the Environment: Case Studies from the Americas. International Development Research Center, Ottawa.

Warner, M. 2000. Tri-sector Partnerships for Social

———. 2000c. The Quality of Growth. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

———. 2001a. Economic Causes of Civil Conflict and their Implications for Policy. Washington, D.C.

Investment within the Oil, Gas and Mining Sec-

———. 2001b. Engendering Development: Through

tor—An Analytical Framework. Working Pa-

Gender Equality in Rights, Resources, and Voice.

per No 2, Business Partners for Development.

A World Bank Policy Research Report. Ox-

WHO (World Health Organization). 1997. World Health Report. Geneva.

World Bank. 1992. World Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

———. 1996a. Energy for Rural Development in China. ESMAP (Energy Sector Management Assistance Programme), Washington, D.C.

ford University Press, Oxford.

———. 2001c. Making Sustainable Commitments: An Environment Strategy for the World Bank.

Washington, D.C. ———. 2001d. Poverty Reduction Strategy Sourcebook. Washington, D.C. ———. 2001e. World Development Indicators.

Washington, D.C.

79

Linking Poverty Reduction and Environmental Management — Policy Challenges and Opportunities

———. 2001f. World Development Report 2000/ 2001 Attacking Poverty. Washington, D.C.

Vision for Water, Life and the Environment. World

———. 2002a. Globalization, Growth, and Poverty:

Water Vision Commission Report. Marseille.

Building an Inclusive World Economy. A World

Yaron, G., and White, J. 2002. Mainstreaming Cross

Bank Policy Research Report. Oxford Univer-

Cutting Themes in Programme and Sector Aid:

sity Press, Oxford.

The Case of Environmental Issues. ODI Natu-

———. 2002b. Water Resources Strategy: Strategic Directions for World Bank Engagement.

Draft for discussion (March 25, 2002). Washington, D.C. ———. 2002c. World Development Indicators 2002.

Washington, D.C. ———. 2002d. World Development Report 2003.

Sustainable Development in a Dynamic Economy. Washington, D.C.

ral Resource Perspectives, No. 77. Overseas Development Institute, London.

Zarsky, L. 1999. “Havens, Halos and Spaghetti: Untangling Evidence about Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment.” In Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.

Zedillo, E. Z., A. Y. Al-Hamad, D. Bryer, M.

WRI (World Resources Institute). 1996. World

Chinery-Hesse, J. Delors, R. Grynspan, A. Y.

Resources 1996–1997. The Urban Environment.

Livshits, A. M. Osman, R. Rubin, M. Singh,

Oxford University Press, Oxford.

and M. Son. 2001. Technical Report of the High-

———. 2000. World Resources 2000–2001. People and Ecosystems. Washington, D.C.

80

World Water Council. 2000. A Water Secure World.

Level Panel on Financing for Development. United Nations, New York.

DFID

Department for International Development 1 Palace Street London SW1E 5HE United Kingdom Switchboard: 020 7023 0000 Facsimile: 020 7023 0016 Internet: www.dfid.gov.uk E-mail: enquiry@dfid.gov.uk Public enquiry point in UK: 0845 3004100; and from overseas: +44 1355 84 3132

United Nations Development Programme One United Nations Plaza New York, New York 10017 U.S.A. Telephone: 212 906 5073 Facsimile: 212 906 6973 Internet: www.undp.org E-mail: surf-env@groups.undp.org

L INKING P OVERTY R EDUCTION AND E NVIRONMENTAL M ANAGEMENT Policy Challenges and Opportunities

Directorate General for Development, European Commission 200 Rue de la Loi 1049 Brussels Belgium Telephone: 2 296 8344 Facsimile: 2 299 2908 Internet: http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/development/index_en.htm Public enquiry e-mail: development@cec.eu.int

The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 U.S.A. Telephone: 202 522 3773 Facsimile: 202 477 0565 Internet: www.worldbank.org/environment E-mail: eadvisor@worldbank.org

Printed on recycled, unbleached paper stock using soy inks. Please recycle.

DFID

Department for International Development

Directorate General for Development European Commission

United Nations Development Programme

The World Bank